From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 00:09:56 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:09:56 -0000 Subject: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126908 This is an admittedly personal, RL experience-based attempt to explain something in the books. It makes use of an extended analogy between the martial art of aikido and the practice of Occlumency, as Occlumency is presented as having skills at base that are strongly parallel. It has at least one huge hole, but there are some nice problems to consider when complaining about said hole. If you are profoundly allergic to RL analogies, don't read this. To put the big contention up front here: effective resistance requires relaxation (clear your mind), but not limpness. The most effective way to push back is not to struggle. Here we go. Occlumency. What does it actually take? First the canon (page numbers from US HB): p. 534, before the beginning of the first attempt, Snape speaks: "You have already shown aptitude at resisting the Imperius Curse...you will find that similar powers are need for this...Brace yourself, now..." p. 535: "You must remain focused. Repel me with your brain and you will not need to resort to your wand." "I'm trying," said Harry angrily, "but you're not telling me how!" [We'll come back to this complaint later.] p. 536: "You are not trying, you are making no effort, you are allowing me access to memories, you are handing me weapons!" p. 538: "You are to rid your mind of all emotion every night before you sleep -- empty it, make it blank and calm, you understand?" [We'll come back to this, too] Aikido as model: I am an avid student of aikido, one of the modern Japanese martial arts. One of the major long-range projects some formulations of it focus on is mind-body unification (which is complicated, to say the least). As you practice, you learn how to truly relax both your mind and your body together, with the result that the two work hand in hand instead of obstructing each other. What I mean here by 'relaxation' is not what casual use of the word denotes. It is not limpness of the muscles, and it is not a state with diminished awareness of what is going on around you. Relaxation is the state where the muscles lack tension, but are in the state where they can be used at any moment. Think about watching a cat jump, and how amazingly strong that cat is pound-for-pound. The cat generally does not have stress or muscle tension, and can thus utilize all of its power. A sleeping cat is amazingly heavy and solid, because the cat is completely relaxed. 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. It is the most desirable condition to be in as it is when anyone is most fully functional. One of the great paradoxes of martial arts is that relaxation is actually the route to stronger resistance. There is a little trick we do called 'Unbendable Arm'. The arm is easily bent when the muscles are either tight or limp, but not when the muscles are truly relaxed. The essence of my foundational argument is that resistance takes relaxation of this particular kind. Tense muscles are weaker than relaxed ones (as you learn quickly when punching things), and tense minds have more trouble doing complex tasks (like the state you need to be in to play a complex piano fugue--you aren't thinking about each note; do that, and you trip and fall, Beethoven wins.) The full- power actualization of willpower takes this kind of relaxed state. It's actually much harder to resist when tight and nervous. It's also difficult to learn what you need to be able to functionally resist when you're getting whacked hard from the get-go. What I know is so counter-intuitive about this is that we tend to think about these things as being opposed, relaxation vs. resistance. But relaxation, true relaxation, is the route to strong resistance. Relaxation allows individual muscles to work together as a unit, becoming considerably stronger. Some schools of martial arts, including aikido, use a number of things that could be considered mystical, such as an emphasis on ki and energy manipulation. I consider mysticism and visualizations as one way to try to get muscles to do specific things; if you envision, for example, light steaming from your fingertips (a very a common visualization), the muscles in your arm that you cannot consciously control individually tend to line up and extend, and there are all kinds of neat results from this that can be physically felt. Interestingly for the analogy here, the feeling that you get when you try to hit (or grab, which is more common in aikido practice) someone who is both relaxed and extended is that you literally bounce off of them, like hitting a ...shield. It's amazingly fun. I want to practice with the people who make me bounce, because I don't feel any force coming from them...or rather, what I am feeling is my own expenditure of force/energy being fed back into myself. I end up on the floor and I don't know why, and I say "Can you do that again?" I think the metaphor I want to construct should be clear now: occlumency's internal focus and resistance to an outside force can be conceptualized as like what the aikidoka does to be able to deal with attackers. The successful Occlumens prevents the Legilimens from obtaining access to his mind; the successful aikidoka is not overwhelmed by an attacker but sends him merrily upon his way. Neither art is aggressive, but is a response to an attack/engagement. The connection of resistance and clearing one's mind is common to both, and sets up the extended analogy?which is by no means complete. How To Learn: Learning to truly relax and have it hold up under testing, with variable amounts of pressure, is very hard and takes an experienced and skilled teacher and a lot of time. The best way not to teach someone is to take a beginner, tell him "Relax!", and then hit him to see if he does. If you repeat it enough, he might get one time where he successfully absorbs/deflects the attack. It's a fluke. He hasn't really learned how to do it systematically. That is the category I put Harry's one notable success in, given the later problems and the lack of repetition. Even when I was an absolute beginner, I managed to drop a senior student very solidly. As he had almost a foot on me, it was very gratifying. Of course, the next time... The hallmark of learning is consistency, and Harry is not consistent. This is in part because Snape's teaching was not producing good foundations (the ability to clear one's mind, for instance) for the actual practice of the skill itself. In my experiences, teaching relaxation requires a truly co-operative model, where the amount of force starts very small, and is an agent of feedback to both the teacher and student. Student learns what force feels like in small amounts that can be dealt with at first, and it then increases over time so that the student is always challenged. It is possible to learn just from being hit, but it takes a lot longer. I was talking with my sensei, and said I wished I could be as good as he is in 10 years (as he's got 10 years on me). He looked at me and said in all seriousness that I could easily be better, since he's teaching me. I don't have to struggle with being taught by being beaten on repeatedly, like he was. To learn in this rough way takes a lot longer and requires some deep self-exploration to develop the ideas that a good teacher would be nurturing from the beginning. You will never teach someone to relax and thus to resist by the 'sink or swim' method unless you have the time to indulge in an infinite number of sinkings, compared to swimmings. Things That Are Like Occlumency: Since the Patronus Charm and resistance to the Imperius Curse occur frequently in discussion about Occlumency, they should be addressed together. Casting a Patronus takes something with a somewhat different orientation than Occlumency; it seems rather externalized rather than an internal property. A Patronus requires summoning up one's happy memories and using them to create an external form, sending them out to conquer the dementor. As well, it consists of an actual charm, a defined thing that one can do, so that Lupin sets Harry to practice the charm itself before releasing the Dementor!Boggart on him. Occlumency has no concrete manifestation like a charm, but is internal, the defense of one's own mind. Summoning a Patronus can be accomplished under stress, as we see Harry summon Prongs when he absolutely must. Occlumency does not seem to function under stress; it cannot be practiced by kicking out in a panic. All evidence points to Occlumency requiring getting down with your own mind, and I respectfully submit that that's hard. I read Harry's resistance to the Imperius curse as a successful 'centering' operation. He hears the inner voice of resistance that questions Moody's commands and reaches a state wherein he and that voice are unified in purpose. This allows him to breaks the hold of the curse. This kind of resistance and Occlumency both seem to involve getting together with yourself, getting everything in line focused on one purpose, being balanced and not distracted by strong emotions which interfere. Stubbornness and a desire for things not to be seen helps, but Harry would have had to really get himself together to do that consistently. Consistency is what he does not show. Failure Is Not An Option: Why does Harry fail? One area where Snape is absolutely correct (but raises some very interesting questions about Snape himself, to be addressed below) is that Harry's anger is undoing him. Anger clouds the mind, and prevents one from relaxing or resisting effectively. That seems at least some support for my reading. Harry is also left without any explicit method for what he is doing? hence his complaint above, "You're not telling me how!". Of course, a lot of these things cannot be encapsulated in neat little instruction booklets that a simple read of will provide the path to enlightenment. As mentioned above, there are a number of methods to help someone figure out how to do these things, none of which are provided by Snape. I remember thinking, when reading these passages, "He's never going to learn how to really relax and do this if you go about it like that--he's just going to learn to hit back." It's hard to do this 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, frustrated and angry and not understanding what's going on. When Harry does try to clear his mind in the chapter "Seen and Unforseen", he fails because of his anger. Trust plays an important role as well. From my own experiences, you are learning to do things where at almost any point, the person who is throwing you could hurt you very, very severely--and it becomes aikido practice in part because they have the ability to choose not to. Any beginner has to put their body into the hands of someone else and trust the senior partner to not hurt them, to keep the beginner from hurting himself, and teach with good faith. You have to trust your teacher, and trust and fear are mutually exclusive. Occlumency doesn't involve bodily harm, but for Harry it does involve pain, the worsening of his scar. It is also a deeply personal thing to have one's memories exposed to anyone. And while Harry knows that he should trust Snape (because Dumbledore does), he has no reason to trust Snape personally. Harry has no actual knowledge about Snape's allegiances and motivations, and Snape's past (and present) behavior towards him places another obstacle in his path. The reluctance to explain anything to Harry takes a severe toll here, as well. And Now, The Problems: There's a big gaping hole in this entire account, and I'd be remiss if I didn't point it out myself. How did Snape learn Occlumency and how does he do it, given that he seems to conflict so overtly with a number of the foundational ideas I've laid out here? He is presented as an angry man, frequently annoyed and disaffected, holding on tightly to grudges and injuries from the past. This is not even to mention that knowing how to do something and being able to teach it are not the same thing. My options are as: 1. My model is completely flawed and Snape's own intense emotions have no effect on his Occlumency skills. Very possible, but I was able to reasonably support my model from the text. We'll come back to this one. 2. Snape is an excellent actor and his apparent losses of temper and lack of self-control are simply that?apparent. I'm not terribly fond of this characterization of Snape for a number of reasons. It made more sense pre-OotP (trying to address the PoA blowup) than after. It's a possibility, but needs some confirmation to justify reading strongly against canonical events. (MAGIC DISHWASHER crew, I'm looking your direction.) 3. There are a number of different ways to practice Occlumency, and Snape's success at it is based on different foundations than this potential projected one derived from a teaching scenario for the very specific case of Harry. [One reader of a draft of this proposed that Snape, who would be dead if Voldemort knew that he was resisting? assuming that Snape is back dealing with Voldemort personally in the first place?must be doing something different than Harry, whose struggles are tangible. I don't think that's necessary, as the discrepancies are explainable by the contrast of an expert and an amateur.] That leads back into number one like this: The easiest solution, and one we have a distinct probability of getting in a few months, is the authorial fiat: a direct statement of "This is how Occlumency actually works and this explains the discrepancies, everyone". However, aren't authorial fiats the thing that frequently raises the ire of the discussion community here? I've seen any number of general complaints about the method of communicating information being telling us rather than showing, leaving any number of holes open. We may simply be left with the statement "Snape knows Occlumency well, but he was unable to teach it effectively to Harry". This would not be surprising, as not every excellent practitioner is an excellent teacher, and Snape's pedagogical skills are not his high point. As Dumbledore practically says "Mistake on my part to ask Snape to teach you", this gains some support. (Lupin seems introduced as a character precisely in order to contrast with Snape on teaching style and effectiveness, if you want to get meta). Where Snape learned Occlumency, how he got good at it--your guess is as good as mine. At the present state of knowledge, keeping my explanation internal while applying a useful framework from outside explains a lot of things, but it leaves a number of holes. I finish with the hope that some of this will survive next book, and it will become clearer. -Nora notes that if she didn't have that pull in the right hamstring, she'd be on the mat tonight From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 00:21:45 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:21:45 -0000 Subject: The countdown thingy and Hogsmead weekend in HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126909 The countdown thingy... it looks like Hermione, Ron and Ginny could be looking at the Dark Mark, obviously. I'm guessing that this Dark Mark appears on a late fall or winter Hogsmead Weekend. Ron appears be wearing a jacket and there's a silhouette of a town in the background. So, who's house is the Dark Mark over? No way to know until the blessed month of July. Kemper From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 02:54:16 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:54:16 -0000 Subject: Squibs In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20050331070546.026cb808@filter.hcsmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126910 Dreamy wrote: >JKR has put an article on her website stating that: A Squib is almost the opposite of a Muggle-born wizard: he or she is a non- magical person born to at least one magical parent. Squibs are rare; magic is a dominant and resilient gene. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/extrastuff_view.cfm?id=19 >Any child of a Squib would depend on who their grandparents were to determine whether they would be a half blood or not. Pure Blood is determined by having 4 magical grandparents. If a Squib was from a pureblood family and so was the witch/wizard marrying the Squib, I would think they would be a pureblood. >If a child of a squib had Muggle grandparents or at least one Muggle grandparent then the child would be a half-blood. >These are of course my theories based on JKR's own provided information. They are open to criticism. Kemper now: I think that you are correct in your assumption that if a Squib of pureblood heritage married a Pureblood their offspring would be pureblood (scientifically with a lowercase `p'); however, I don't think they would be Pureblood (socially with uppercase `p'), and it is this distinction that matters within Magical culture. I don't know how often I've posted this quote, but again from CoS hardback "He did it, he did it!" Filch spat, his pouchy face purpling. "You saw what he wrote on the wall! He found ? in my office ? he knows I'm a ? I'm a ?" Filch's face worked horribly. "He knows I'm a Squib!" he finished. (CS 142) This is what Tom Riddle through Ginny " wrote on the wall": THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS HAS BEEN OPENED. ENEMIES OF THE HEIR, BEWARE. (CS 138) So, the Squib considers himself an "enemy of the heir." Since Filch doesn't say "He knows my mom was a Muggle!" nor does he say "He knows my dad's a Muggle-born wizard!", I'm guessing that Filch comes from a Pureblood background which may explain some of his resentments. Back to Dreamy, who also surmises that Filch comes from Pureblood heritage: >This Kwikspell course that he was doing was basically Filch refusing to accept the fact that he had no magic and was going to try any means necessary to get magic even if it was risky. I surmise that Filch was probably a pureblood Squib, though it has yet to be proven. I am theorizing from the fact that he seems to be hoping more than anything that the course will work. Kemper now: I think we can agree that Filch is from pureblood stock, but since he considers himself an enemy of the heir, I'm also surmising, as I've posted on other threads, that Filch thinks of himself as a Mudblood, not because he was born of Muggle parents, but because he was born a Muggle essentially. Where would he get the identity that Squibs are Mudbloods... from Purebloodists for sure, but to a lesser degree from the Magical world who are Seperatists, it is the Magical World that keeps it self away from the Non-magical World, and a Squib is Non- magical. >Though, this also brings up an interesting question... would Filch sell out Dumbledore if Voldemort promised him magic? Don't think it would happen, but Filch seems to be very unhappy with the way certain things are run. Do you think it is possible if he was given the opportunity. Kemper now: I think Filch would sell out Dumbledore if the false-possibility of magic was offered to him. He hates himself too much to do anything different. It seems as though he hides his Squibiness rather well as shown in OoP when Umbridge advises him to avoid using a certain spell against the magical fireworks that the twins set. Then again, Umbridge may not want to see the truth in some things that go against her worldview. Kemper, a Squib lover who thinks that the Purebloodists would start a website called godhatessquibs.com where there would be a countup (opposite of countdown) of the number of days Mr. Figg has been in hell. The Squib lover also thinks that Mr. Figg was a Squib who was murdered by some Purebloodists, probably DE's, one of who is named Macnair. Anyone up for a fanfic? From orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 00:52:43 2005 From: orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk (orqad7) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 00:52:43 -0000 Subject: Harry's dead (short lifeline) In-Reply-To: <98A5A454-741F-11D9-BF14-000A95C61C7C@yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126913 > Caesian wrote in #123612: > In that scenario, when Voldemort dies, so does Harry. J.K has given a really big clue which, in a way relates directly to this theory. She said in one of her interviews that a question which she has not been asked which she feels she should have been, is not why Harry lived, but why Voldemort did not die. I think she is quite decided that Harry lived, but why didn't LV die? So far I have one thoery of my own and a really good one that someone else wrote an essay on. My theory is that Voldemort did not die BECAUSE Harry lived. (All arguments for and against will be greatly recieved.) Something to do with LV transferring some of himself onto Harry. So a part of him still existed in Harry, therefore he could not die. The second theory which I wish was my own is along the lines of the measures LV has taken to ensure he did not die. The general idea is that he has to kill all blood relatives to become immortal. (to read the column which I think everyone should, visit www.hplexicon.com) I really have gone off on a tangent, but I can't help myself!! One last bit, In OotP when Hagrid returns, he is covered in cuts and bruises, and uses dragon meat to help the healing process. Is this one of the 12 uses for dragons blood? Is it one of the steps to immortality? Don't know if any of this made sense, but have been waiting for ages to write everything down. orqad7 From orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 01:10:36 2005 From: orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk (orqad7) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 01:10:36 -0000 Subject: Book 6 spoiler J.K 's paragraph Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126914 I keep re-reading the paragraph that J.K posted on her site. Who is the paragraph about? (or what?) Is it important? "He looked like an old lion" Lion makes me think of Gryffindor. So someone good? He. So it's a man, or a male to be more precise. Wire-rimmed spectacles. Who do we know that wears spectacles? Walks with a loping grace. Makes me think someone tall, or at least not anyone short. Could it be Dumbledore? I know what you're thinking. Definitely not. The fact that there are streaks of grey in his tawny mane, and we know that Dumbledore has gone completely grey by now. What if it's a memory? Something in Dumbledore's pensieve? Maybe some memory from when LV was last at his most powerful. It says he walks with a limp. This makes me thing he's been injured. So perhaps in book 6 we will find out why Voldemort is only afraid of Dumbledore. Maybe we'll find out what happened to make LV fear him. "orqad7" From WNCMegs at aol.com Fri Apr 1 01:13:30 2005 From: WNCMegs at aol.com (Megan) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 01:13:30 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126915 I wonder, what the other Hogwart students wanted to be when they grew up Take the Slytherins for example. I have read a lot of the discussion on did ALL DEs come from the Slytherin house. I don't believe so. a) Peter Pettigrew was a DE (in the end) b) Time, life, curses effect people. Many people's ideas change as they grow older. Ideas can seem alight in the beginning. That is probably how Voldermort got so many followers. Sirus makes the statement in OotP that his parents were not DEs but agreed with the "Pure Blood is BEST!" mentality. Many people probably though his ideas were good in a sense when he was gaining power. They didn't realize that he was without a conscience and should run FAR FAR away. Even Sirius' brother got sucked into the DE life. He ended up wanting out because he saw Voldemort was evil but was killed. It is either join us or DIE! Anyway, back to the job idea What I REALLY wonder is what Draco told Snape he wanted to be when he grew up. I don't remember seeing any DE brochures lying around Hogwarts along with the Auror or Gringotts pamphlets. "Are you a PUREBLOOD? Do you despise those who are not? Do you like killing and want to feel the rush of the fear of death and find creepy skull tattoos awesome? If so, become a DE!!!" I doubt that was there. I wonder if any Slytherin or ANY student would want to become one. I can imagine Draco asking Snape "Hey, AWESOME TATOO!!! Can I get one if I become a DE???" I know these things are somewhat pointless to the whole storyline but I wonder if students whose parents are known DEs are going to find it hard to get a job? I doubt the Ministry is going to hire a child of a DE to become an Auror. Does anyone think it would be possible for them to even get a job within the Ministry? What do you think the other Hogwarts students we know want to be when they get out of Hogwarts and IF they get out of Hogwarts? ~Megan~ From captivity at gmail.com Fri Apr 1 02:07:22 2005 From: captivity at gmail.com (-p) Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 21:07:22 -0500 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: <1112313468.33477.71415.m13@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112313468.33477.71415.m13@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126916 I'm banking on the figure on the right being Mrs.Weasley - I can so vividly see the Weasley parents passing on in the next book. I'm from the "the figure on the right is ghostly ie dead" camp and I don't see Ginny shedding this mortal coil in the next book. As far as keeping the plot rolling, I think that there is room to cut the Weasley parents. -p From orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 02:14:41 2005 From: orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk (orqad7) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 02:14:41 -0000 Subject: Beware the lighting (was Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126917 Grand Pre chooses the colouring for her artwork carefully. There has been a great deal of speculation about Harry having his mother's GREEN eyes. Trying to follow some kind of logic do you think the eyes are the reason for the colour? Or perhaps something to do with the green light on the night James and Lily died. Maybe DD was there, so Harry and DD are looking into the pensieve at that very night. "orqad7" From bree4378 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 04:03:51 2005 From: bree4378 at yahoo.com (Sabrina) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 04:03:51 -0000 Subject: The Seven Charms Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126918 B.G wrote: > Each charm that guarded the Stone has so far been related to > the plot in each book. So, we can assume that will continue > to be the case. > > 5. troll who did not have to be defeated (I get stuck here) Sabrina wrote: I believe the troll could represent Umbridge or even Cornelius Fudge. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 07:20:58 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:20:58 -0000 Subject: Self-taught Occlumency? Yes, ...Sort of... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126919 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > wrote: > > > Pippin(?) > > > > Point is, Harry didn't try, didn't ask. It's canon that there is > > writing on Imperius resistance, which Snape says requires similar > > technique. > Nora asked: > > Can you point me to the 'writing' part of this canon? I see Crouch! > Moody saying that Imperius can be resisted, and this can be taught. > bboyminn: After the class in which Moody puts the students under the Imperius Curse, Ron said- - - - GoF Am Ed Hb Pg 233 - - - "... And when are we supposed to read up on resisting the Imperius Curse with everything else we've got to do?" - - -end quote- - - Since they were given homework on the Imperius Curse, that does seem to imply that there are some authoratative books written on the subject. In general, regarding whether Occlumency can be self-taught or learned strictly from books, within certain boundaries, I don't think so. However, I do believe a wizard (or witch) could gradually through experience come to discover that they had this talent, and from their refine it both through practice and through consulting resource books to increase their understanding and aid them in their refinement. Harry, however, is much to young and inexperienced to realize and develop this skill without outside help. Even if Hermione learned the Legilimens Spell, which is related to but not the same as the Legilimens Skill, I'm not sure Harry would allow her to use it on him more than once or twice. Once he realized how deeply it allowed her to penetrate his mind, and to what extent it allowed the spell caster to see intimate and personal details, I think he would put a stop to it. There are certain things that teenage boys do and think that they really don't want to reveal to the best mates (male or female). Much better to have a neutral distant third party. I think Harry did demonstrate that he has good (great? maybe, maybe not, but certainly good) natural ability at Occlumency. The problem is that the teaching methods and teaching environment was so adversarial that there was no way that Snape and Harry could cooperate and function effectively. First, it put Harry into a position where his deepest most intimate secrets were accessable to his (relatively speaking) worst enemy. That creates a huge strain in and of itself. Second, you can't order an emotional person to be calm, it just doesn't work the way. Snape ordering Harry to calm himself, is about like poking an anger person with a sharp stick and wondering why he doesn't calm down. An emotional person can be calmed, and a person who is not so much 'emotional' as just aggitated, can also be calmed down. There are very standard straight forward techniques for doing this; ancient techniques. If Snape truly care whether Harry cleared his mind, he would have given him some of these techniques. Third, Snape's snarky brute force technique was far from the best method. Even if I accept that Snape's general method was the standard way to teach Occlumency, he still applied it poorly. He seemed to offer no advice, made no references to effective strategies or techniques, nor did he take a measure approach (start small and work your way up); it was full force, head on, no information, no instruction, no advice. It was more like an assault than a class. Of course, what else would anyone expect if they put Snape and Harry together in a room under these circumstance. I'm somewhat surprised the both survived it as well as they did. Fourth, the Legilimens lessons were an unusual experience for Harry. I got the impression that he was curious about the cascade of images that came from his mind, and was actually interested in seeing them UNTIL something very personal appeared, then he was able to stop the cascade immediately. So, in this last item we see the measure of Harry real ability, when he wants them to stop, he makes them stop. As to teaching yourself or learning without an experienced teacher, I think it is an extremely difficult task. But, I make the exception that a person, like Snape, could discover this ability on their own, probably by experiencing it a few times and thereby becoming aware of it, from there they could possibly refine and develop it. But I think Harry, Ron, and Hermione are far to young and inexperienced to accomplish this. Now in the next books, Harry does have some experience, and Hermione surely is able to gather knowledge on the subject. So, self-help is possible at this point, but we still hit the snag I pointed out, who does Harry trust enough, to potential reveal his deepest most intimate secrets too? I think Ron and Hermione are much to close to him for him to reveal himself that deeply. The only unquestionable progress I suspect will be made by Harry on his own. He now knows he has this ability, and he knows how important it is, so I'm sure he will continue. If for no other reason that to learn to control the link between himself and Voldemort. First, to protect the Order. Second, he has discovered that the link can be useful, but he has to control it, he has to control how and when he and Voldemort enter each other's minds. I think that will be very critical in the future. Though, I believe the above is true, I'm not discounting the possibility of help, encouragement, and even instruction from other people like Dumbledore, Remus, Moody, etc... Just a few thoughts. Steve From bree4378 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 04:20:02 2005 From: bree4378 at yahoo.com (Sabrina) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 04:20:02 -0000 Subject: Quidditch in HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126920 My prediction goes as follows: Harry - seeker - it is part of his identity now, Umbridge is gone, and it is the thing that brings him the most joy. Ron - keeper - triumphed in the end of book 5, he has the characteristics that make a good keeper, by being able to forsee what is coming, and know how to move. (I believe Ron may be a Seer.) Ginny - chaser - this is her preference, she states so in OOTP, she can see the goal/end result. Katie Bell - chaser - will remain so, and will probably be captain since she has been on the team the longest. Seamus - chaser - it has been said that he flies well. Dean and Neville - beaters - to keep the familiar characters in the forefront. I believe that Harry will be able to rejoin the team, and Ginny will remain. This may help move along the storyline of a Harry/Ginny SHIP. (although I don't think it will be prominent) Hermione, will not be on the team, because she does not like flying. Sabrina From havelockxf at hotmail.com Fri Apr 1 04:53:50 2005 From: havelockxf at hotmail.com (Kathie) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 04:53:50 -0000 Subject: Half-Blood Prince? Wizarding World monarchy? (Seamus) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126921 The term Half-Blood Prince, to me, suggests that there is or was a monarchy in the Wizarding World. And Voldemort's title of "Lord" something in acquired when he overthrew the royal family. I've always wondered why Seamus' mother didn't tell her husband that she was a witch until after they were married. That's an enormous secret to keep from someone you love. It should have been confessed sometime before the wedding! My theory is that, Mrs. Finnigan is a member of this 'wizard monarchy' and was forced underground (just like the Potters) during Voldemort's reign. She couldn't tell her Muggle husband that she was a witch, much less a royal witch, for her own protection. My daughter is reading "Anastasia" and it gave me the idea. Yeah, I think Seamus Finnigan is the half-blood prince. ;) Nunley From someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au Fri Apr 1 06:17:30 2005 From: someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au (Someone) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 06:17:30 -0000 Subject: Lupins Role in Book 7? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126922 Hi, guys. Just a question for the old-timers (pre 2001 fans), or anyone else who's interested. Does anyone remember JKR saying, in response to a fan's question about whether Lupin would reappear in future books, that, yes, we'd see him again in Book 5, but that it was really in Book 7 that he'd have his day, playing a "really massive role" (or something like that)? I read this somewhere in, I *think*, 2001 (it was, at any rate, during the dark ages, post-Gof but pre-OOTP), but I can't find any interview transcript of it over the internet, and I'm damned if I'm going to wade through four years worth of posts on this site. I know a lot of rubbish is written on the web; that's probably the case here as well; but anyone want to confirm/deny the existence of this phantom comment? John. From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 06:45:54 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 06:45:54 -0000 Subject: Self-taught Occlumency? I think not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126923 Nora wrote: > Snape's education in Occlumency and skills at it are my admitted > hole. However, we have some hints in canon as to Dumbledore' > ultimate disappointment in Snape's actions as teacher. Is it > really so hard to imagine Snape letting his personal interests > and feelings get the better of him--unless you want to cling to > the MD reading of Snape in the Shack, it makes thematic sense for > the character. I was wondering if occlumency might be considered to be a 'dark art'. Sorry but I don't have the book to hand but in OOP, Sirius or Lupin when reassuring Harry after he'd seen James' behaviour in the Pensieve said something along the lines of 'Snape was an unpopular boy who was up to his eyes in the dark arts and whatever else James was, he always hated the dark arts'. Perhaps Snape learnt this through his meddling with the dark arts (self-taught or with tutoring, who knows) and that is why someone like Professor McGonagall wasn't able to teach it to Harry - she seems to be pretty hot on all other types of magic. Karen From someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au Fri Apr 1 07:50:23 2005 From: someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au (Someone) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:50:23 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings (Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126924 -p wrote: > I'm banking on the figure on the right being Mrs.Weasley - I can > so vividly see the Weasley parents passing on in the next book. > I'm from the "the figure on the right is ghostly ie dead" camp and > I don't see Ginny shedding this mortal coil in the next book. As > far as keeping the plot rolling, I think that there is room to cut > the Weasley parents. John: Ooh, take any number of Ron's family; I think the world in general could do with a good few less Weasleys. Why would JKR have so many, other then to knock off a few of `em and bring Ron into the fray personally? The bloke needs his own battles to fight for a change. John, sharpening the carving knives in anticipation. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 08:00:09 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 08:00:09 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126925 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Megan" wrote: > > I wonder, what the other Hogwart students wanted to be when they > grew up > > ...edited... > > Anyway, back to the job idea > > What I REALLY wonder is what Draco told Snape he wanted to be when > he grew up. I don't remember seeing any DE brochures lying around > Hogwarts ...edited... > > ...I wonder if students whose parents are known DEs are going > to find it hard to get a job? ...Does anyone think it would be > possible for them to even get a job within the Ministry? > > What do you think the other Hogwarts students we know want to be > when they get out of Hogwarts and IF they get out of Hogwarts? > > ~Megan~ bboyminn: Well, as far as Slytherins and especially Draco, what they want to be when they grow up is . . . . . RICH! Draco is easy, he comes for what appears to be an 'Old Money' family, all he has to do is continue with his father's partronage network and his many business ventures. Even if Lucius is scum, there are still a lot of people who depend on his money to keep the wheel of business rolling. As to most kid in Slytherin, I think they are like the kids who go to business school. They dream of being entrepreneur, and focus mainly on building wealth. Some like Theodore Nott will probably succeed greatly on their own. Others like Draco will rely on what Daddy already owns to expand their wealth. I see Hufflepuffs as hardworking and successful at what ever they do, further I see them in all aspect of the normal world. Some are workers, some are small businessmen, some are craftsmen, but I see them seeking middle-class stability rather than the great wealth that Slytherins dream of. Of course, that doesn't mean Hufflepuffs can run a business that is so successful and well managed that it makes the wealthy. But I see that more as a product of hard work and sound business practices rather than the raw Slytherin ambition. Ravenclaw, like Hufflepuffs fit into all aspect of the labor and business world, but I see them more as 'executives'. That makes them ideal for upper management and Ministry positions. I'm not limiting them to that, just pointing out a general trend. Gryffindors are also very flexible in the range of potential occupations, but I see them as independant businessmen, in general government offices like Auror gradually working their way up to Department Heads. But I also seem them as good politician, given the propensity to try to act for the greater good. When considering occupations I like to remind people to look beyond the obvious at all the support businesses that are necessary to make any obvious business work. Take Fortesque's ice cream shop, consider all the secondary businesses it take to keep that simple ice cream shop running; farms, manufacturers, construction, import/export, bakeries, candies, fixtures, furniture, cups, bowls, plates, cones, fruit and nut toppings, spoons, etc... etc... etc.... All those secondary things are working successful businesses and valid occupations. You can apply that to any obvious business whether wands, quidditch supplies, potions supplies, pet shops, clothes, magical instruments, cafes, Inns, Pubs, etc... and see the many many businesses it take to support them. We can assume there are magical Beer/Wine/Ale/Mead makers, magical farmers and magical bakeries to supply the magical cafes, even magical coffee and tea importers to supply those same cafes/pubs/inns. So, available occupations are not a limited as they might initially seem. Personally, in my own warped extension of the wizard world, I see Seamus and Dean starting an advertising agency that makes use of Dean's artistic abilities. Hermione I see as a free-lance magical consultant. She is hired by various sorts of magical businesses to solve business related magical problems. In my twisted wizard world, she has invented new building techniques for magical construction companies, and new diagnostic spells for St. Mungos; and more. After a few years as Aurors, Ron and Harry retire and assist Fred and George with their business ventures which have grown into one of the wizard worlds largest magical employeers, and even branched out into muggle products. Neville, of couse, is happily married to a beautiful wife (Melissa) and have three happy healthy children (boy and two girls), and spend his time in North Central England running his rare and exotic magical plant and herb farm. Percy, despite a few setbacks, in time works his way up to Junior Minister, and could actually become the Minister of Magic someday. Ginny is wealthy by association with her brothers, so she doesn't need a steady job, she rambles from job to job until she eventually meets Prince Harry in a nightclub and after a long courtship, marries him. Then again, maybe not. Aren't you glad you asked? Steve/bboyminn From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 08:45:22 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 08:45:22 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126928 > bboyminn: > Personally, in my own warped extension of the wizard world, I see > Seamus and Dean starting an advertising agency that makes use of > Dean's artistic abilities. Hermione I see as a free-lance magical > consultant. She is hired by various sorts of magical businesses to > solve business related magical problems. In my twisted wizard world, > she has invented new building techniques for magical construction > companies, and new diagnostic spells for St. Mungos; and more. After a > few years as Aurors, Ron and Harry retire and assist Fred and George > with their business ventures which have grown into one of the wizard > worlds largest magical employeers, and even branched out into muggle > products. Neville, of couse, is happily married to a beautiful wife > (Melissa) and have three happy healthy children (boy and two girls), > and spend his time in North Central England running his rare and > exotic magical plant and herb farm. Percy, despite a few setbacks, in > time works his way up to Junior Minister, and could actually become > the Minister of Magic someday. Ginny is wealthy by association with > her brothers, so she doesn't need a steady job, she rambles from job > to job until she eventually meets Prince Harry in a nightclub and > after a long courtship, marries him. Then again, maybe not. Kemper now: Hermione would be good as a consultant and paid quite well, but I see her more as becoming the first Secretary General for the United Magically-Aware Beings. Dobby would be ambassador to the Elfs. Firenze, the Centaur. Grawp, the Giants. Neville will be the new DADA professor, much to Snape's chagrin. I like Ginny hooking up with Prince Harry and hope she doesn't die in a horrible broom crash as she tries to avoid the paparazzi lead by everybody's favorite celebrity shooter, Colin Creevy. From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Apr 1 08:47:30 2005 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 08:47:30 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_Lupin=92s_Role_in_Book_7=3F?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126929 John wrote: Does anyone remember JKR saying, in > response to a fan's question about whether Lupin would reappear in > future books, that, yes, we'd see him again in Book 5, but that it > was really in Book 7 that he'd have his day, playing a "really > massive role" (or something like that)? > I remember JKR saying that we'd see him again in book 5, but not the stuff about book 7, I'm afraid. Doesn't mean she didn't say it, of course, you could try asking here: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/forum/cgi-bin/ikonboard.cgi? s=3f492106edabeefe3a55cbcc6c578fba;act=ST;f=58;t=69 Alternatively you could email Madame Scoop or the Quick Quotes Quill - they're extremely helpful. Dungrollin Trying again to get the link right... From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 09:07:02 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:07:02 -0000 Subject: Self-taught Occlumency? I think not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126930 Karen wrote: > I was wondering if occlumency might be considered to be a 'dark > art'. Sorry but I don't have the book to hand but in OOP, Sirius > or Lupin when reassuring Harry after he'd seen James' behaviour in > the Pensieve said something along the lines of 'Snape was an > unpopular boy who was up to his eyes in the dark arts and whatever > else James was, he always hated the dark arts'. Perhaps Snape > learnt this through his meddling with the dark arts (self-taught or > with tutoring, who knows) and that is why someone like Professor > McGonagall wasn't able to teach it to Harry - she seems to be pretty > hot on all other types of magic. Kemper now: This has been an interesting thread. No I don't think it's a dark art. But I think Snape did develop his mastery of Occlumency as a defense against 'mental' abuse at home. I suspect that Snape's dad may have used Legilimency 'against' Snape. The dad seems controlling, as abuser are, so it's easy to see how the dad would 'assault' his son's mind to see if his son was telling the truth about something or to see what interactions Snape had with his mother... thereby also keeping an 'eye' on his wife when he's away. was to find out what he had been doing or maybe what his mom was he's away. Snape either developed Occlumency on his own... as many victims of continued violence disassociate mentally... or his mom secretly taught him. just some guesses. Kemper From mfterman at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 08:36:49 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 08:36:49 -0000 Subject: Quidditch in HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126931 My predictions: Seeker: Harry Potter Keeper: Ron Weasley Chaser: Katie Bell (Captain) Chaser: Ginny Weasley Chaser: (unknown) Beater: (unknown 2nd year) Beater: (unknown 2nd year) While everyone would like to put a bunch of sixth years on the team, I don't think it's likely to happen. Remember that they had three Chasers and a Keeper who were upperclassmen and only made token appearances in the first three books, I don't really see any reason not to stick in new faces. As for the Beaters being unknown second years, that follows from the fact that no one wants to go with this years Beaters if possible, and given they were the best of the lot available from 2nd-7th years, any Beaters with talent will have to have been first years in OotP, but without getting Harry's lucky break. Harry isn't quite ready to be Captain this year, and may not be ready next year either. As Dumbledore observed when he passed Harry over for Prefect, Harry already has a considerable amount on his plate. On the whole, I don't think Harry will be particularly upset if Katie's Captain this year. It's one less thing for him to worry about. "mfterman" From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 09:23:22 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:23:22 -0000 Subject: The Seven Charms in HPSS/Troll is Grawp! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126932 BG: > 1. The 3 headed dog (HRH), > 2. the devils snare (plant cure for those > petrified by the monster), > 3. keys - Sirus freed, > 4. chess game - Tri- > wizard Tournament, > 5. troll who did not have to be defeated (I > get stuck here), > 6. potions/Prof. Snape, > 7. THE MIRROR > > What do you think the undefeated troll means in relation to > OOP? Chys: I know I'm a bit late but here's my take; I like to talk too! The numbers representing the books and the tasks that HRH had to live through to get to the stone makes perfect sense. Does the stone itself have a symbolic meaning or reference in this case? (Defeat of LV or something?) I think that with that reasoning, I agree with everything posted in reference to the previous books but in book 5, the Troll would be representative of Grawp's participation in the book. (Obviously. He's big, dumb and destructive like a troll. Plus he sleeps a lot like said troll is unconscious. Also- Ron gains a victory in defeating the troll by learning the levitation charm. (Just a reference here to book 1 in relation to book 5:) Also- Ron gains a personal victory again, of playing quidditch at the time that they meet the giant. And to finish it- He didn't have to be defeated because he wasn't an adersary initially! Grawp is a friend and is helpful when unsuspectedly intervening in their defence in the forset- the troll helped them to identify it was the quirrel/snape conflict incident, leading to a suspicion that started the later adventure, didn't it?) Sorry if someone else came up with this, just my knut on the issue. Chys, back to reading the books again. From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 09:26:35 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:26:35 -0000 Subject: Inheriting Kreacher/Sirius has a will? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126933 > Bookworm: > Kreacher's future is most likely different than the rest of > Sirius' estate. There has been speculation on whether or not > Sirius left a will (probably leaving everything to Harry), > and who his next-of-kin is if there is no will. IIRC, JKR > said we would find out early in HBP. Chys: I was wondering if Spinners End is something that would have been in Sirius's will? Probably not, but I don't know if people discussed this. If it's supposed to be early in the book it's a summer thing right? Maybe this is to do with it. *just wondering aloud* Chys From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Apr 1 11:05:39 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 11:05:39 -0000 Subject: Snape's unfairness was Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and Raistlin Majere In-Reply-To: <424C6C24.7070003@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126934 > > Does he sabotage the potion really? You see, Harry was with his back to > the desk, so it's his guess again. That we, the readers, buy into this > guess so easily, is another demonstration of JKR's skills. Yes, I think that he did. I really don't buy into all the "it's Harry's point of view" argument. I think JKR pretty much presents it like it is. > I read this scene as either the potion rolled off the table, or Draco > helped it on the way down, and Snape, of course, did nothing to save it. Well, that in effect is sabotaging the potion. > > I still recommend that Harry tries his best at each potion, and not to > take his eyes off it until he gets the full marks. I just don't see any future in Harry trying to work with Snape except under the most extraordinary and limited of circumstances. I think that Dumbledore is coming to that conclusion as well. I think that he probably believed, up until OOTP, that when push came to shove Snape could put aside his grudge, especially if he were given the type of information he would obtain from Harry's mind during Occlumency classes. I interpret the heaviness in Dumbledore's voice as he acknowledges his mistake as being a combination of weariness and disappointment in both himself and Snape. The simple fact of the matter is that there are some people who just cannot work together for an extended time. People who have a very deep and lasting grudge will always find ways to express it, whether given an excuse or not. No amount of patience and no number of repeated attempts to work together will make any difference. I suppose JKR could write Harry as a kind of "suffering martyr" who decides to put up with Snape for the good of the cause, but that would be a silly and insipid thing to do, not to mention unrealistic and unbelievable -- much more worthy of a Sunday School lesson or an after school special than a well-written story. If I had to bet I would say that Harry will get into Advanced Potions one way or another. I would also bet the whole thing will be an absolute disaster with Snape and Harry in an ever-escalating war that ends in a rather spectacular and amusing fashion. I can see Snape and Harry working together for a very limited time for a very limited goal, say on a specific mission for the Order. Anything beyond that is asking too much of human nature, and Dumbledore would be well advised to keep the two of them apart as much as possible. Lupinlore From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 11:39:24 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 11:39:24 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126935 >Megan wrote: > > Anyway, back to the job idea > I know these things are somewhat pointless to the whole storyline > but I wonder if students whose parents are known DEs are going > to find it hard to get a job? I doubt the Ministry is going to hire > a child of a DE to become an Auror. Does anyone think it would be > possible for them to even get a job within the Ministry? > > What do you think the other Hogwarts students we know want to be > when they get out of Hogwarts and IF they get out of Hogwarts? Hannah: Liked the 'Death Eater pamphlet,' Megan! I suspect some of the Slytherins like Draco may wish to be Death Eaters, but that's more of a hobby than a career - many of the DE's seem to have day jobs as well, just as do most of the Order. I doubt Draco expects to do anything as common as work - he'll do as his father used to; live off his inherited fortune and go around schmoozing politians and taking part in 'good works.' I don't think we know enough about the other Slytherins to decide what any of them would like. Now for the other students' future careers: Harry: Pro Quidditch Seeker for England and the Chudley Cannons. Ron: Broom designer and engineer. Hermione: Either an Unspeakable or an elf-rights activist/ spokesperson. That might be in an official capacity with the Ministry, or independantly, depeding on the post-VW2 situation. Neville: Herbology professor. Luna: Journalist, like her Dad. Ginny: Either something in the Ministry or a part of Fred and George's joke emporium. Colin: Photographer for the Prophet or the Quibbler or both. Just my opinion! Hannah From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 12:04:22 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 12:04:22 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings (Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126936 > -p wrote: > > I'm banking on the figure on the right being Mrs.Weasley - I can > > so vividly see the Weasley parents passing on in the next book. > > I'm from the "the figure on the right is ghostly ie dead" camp and > > I don't see Ginny shedding this mortal coil in the next book. As > > far as keeping the plot rolling, I think that there is room to cut > > the Weasley parents. > > > John: > Ooh, take any number of Ron's family; I think the world in general > could do with a good few less Weasleys. Why would JKR have so many, > other then to knock off a few of `em and bring Ron into the fray > personally? The bloke needs his own battles to fight for a change. Hannah: Well, doesn't Molly herself say that with all the Weasleys in the Order it would be a miracle if they all survived? I think there'll be two or three Weasley deaths over two books - not too many, because I don't think JKR would kill that many of them. I think it'll be one parent (not both), one of the twins, and either Bill or Charlie. Weasley deaths (with the exception of Ron and Ginny) have the advantage of being sad without being too distressing for young readers. And virtually everyone in the fandom seems to agree that at least one of them dying is inevitable, so I suppose people are prepared. Hannah From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 13:59:04 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 05:59:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wider thoughts on Hermione 's lying In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050401135905.80751.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 126937 >"moondance241" wrote: > > Knowing 11 year olds (I have one), I would think she'd be more > likely to tell on the boys (even with the risk of losing more > points) then to lie for for them. I haven't figured out her > motivation. > > > Geoff: [added a number of excerpts from the book here] > From my experience of teaching, I often found that, if you had a > disagreement with a boy, the matter had usually blown over by the > following lesson and things were back to normal. If you crossed > swords with a girl pupil, she would often sulk for days. This has > happened with Hermione. Actually just reading over Geoff's excerpts here, I realize that Hermione - in her own gauche bossy socially-maladjusted way - was trying to BEFRIEND Ron and Harry through her interference with their plans. By lying for them about the troll incident, Hermione has (with a flash of insight rare for her) realized what she should do to show the guys she wants to be their friend - she doesn't tell the truth which should be enough but adds a lie so that they are all three complicit in the incident. What really happened is a secret they all share, and that creates a bond. Magda (wondering if gauche, bossy, socially-maladjusted 11-year-old Snape tried to befriend James and Sirius the same way and it backfired) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates. http://personals.yahoo.com From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 15:07:30 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:07:30 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126938 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Megan" wrote: > I know these things are somewhat pointless to the whole storyline > but I wonder if students whose parents are known DEs are going > to find it hard to get a job? I doubt the Ministry is going to hire > a child of a DE to become an Auror. Does anyone think it would be > possible for them to even get a job within the Ministry? GEO: With the proper bribes, I believe even Draco Malfoy could become the Minister of Law Enforcement afterall his father was still able to exert control within the ministry after the first fall of Voldemort and besides I think Rowling is trying to go with the whole theme of little evils rising up after the fall of greater evils. We know that DD defeated Grindelwald in the same year that Tom Riddle killed his father and grandparents and started on the path into becoming the next Dark Wizard. One wonders who will replace Voldemort as the next Dark Lord? > What do you think the other Hogwarts students we know want to be > when they get out of Hogwarts and IF they get out of Hogwarts? GEO: Draco Malfoy- Future Dark Lord in the making perhaps with his own secret alter ego ala Tom Riddle? I mean Lord Draco just doesn't inspire awe and fear, a secret anagramed name would be much better. Parkinson, Goyle, Crabbe and Bulstrode- Junior and Future Death Eaters in the Making. Harry- perhaps leading the Order of the Phoenix or some other opposition against the Dark Arts. After what the ministry has done, I really don't think he's going to go up and work for the public sector. Neville- potions professor most likely Ron- I suspect that he might have a quidditch career after his term as keeper for the Gryffindor Team. Perhaps he just might help and break the Cannons' losing streak. Hermione- No idea perhaps an unspeakable or someone campaigning for Elf Rights. Luna- writer for the Daily Quibbler no doubt. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 15:21:05 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:21:05 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126939 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, -p wrote: > > I'm banking on the figure on the right being Mrs.Weasley - I can > so vividly see the Weasley parents passing on in the next book. > I'm from the "the figure on the right is ghostly ie dead" camp and > I don't see Ginny shedding this mortal coil in the next book. GEO: However I can specifically since HBP has some connection to the second novel, which Ginny did play a crucial part and this could be some important follow up to Tom Riddle's possession of her and Rowling's words that the diary could have strengthened the Dark Lord meaning that Ginny might be unknowingly connected to the reborn Dark Lord now. Beside anyone know of anyone else among the six that would play the role of Judas Iscariot/Wormtail? As > far as keeping the plot rolling, I think that there is room to cut > the Weasley parents. GEO: Molly yes, but I really don't see Arthur or any of the six Weasley brothers dying. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 15:47:17 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:47:17 -0000 Subject: Why didn't Voldemort Die and other Questions Re: Harry's dead (short lifeline) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126940 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "orqad7" wrote: > > > Caesian wrote in #123612: > > In that scenario, when Voldemort dies, so does Harry. > > J.K has given a really big clue which, in a way relates directly > to this theory. She said in one of her interviews that a question > which she has not been asked which she feels she should have been, > is not why Harry lived, but why Voldemort did not die. GEO: This subject has just been recently discussed in the afhp newsgroup and someone actually posted a theory that actually made sense in my opinion in relation to Rowling's words that Voldemort's immortality was somehow related to the prophecy and that specifically was that Voldemort gave up the ability to love or externalized that part of him (perhaps his heart like Koschei the Deathless) that was capable of the power that he now knows not in order to achieve his supposed immortality. That would also explain DD's gleam in GoF since the maternal protection that both Harry and Voldemort has and was probably also in Harry's blood was based in love and thus could have weakened Voldemort's immortality. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 1 16:08:02 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 16:08:02 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126941 Megan wrote: > I wonder, what the other Hogwart students wanted to be when they > grew up snip > What I REALLY wonder is what Draco told Snape he wanted to be when > he grew up. Potioncat: That's one of many conversations I would have like to have read! At any rate, here's my thoughts. I'm using past canon and anticipating needs of plot for my predictions. Ultimate careers will determine current classes and allow for whatever interaction JKR has in mind. I assume that the Malfoys are in some sort of business. I remember being surprised that Lucius was addressed as "Mr. Malfoy" by Harry. I had sort of expected him to be Sir Malfoy. So I would expect Draco would want to continue earning big Malfoy bucks and hobnobbing with important people. Magical Business Administration? Although I wouldn't be surprised if Draco earned a spot in NEWT Potions, I can't see adult Draco making his own potions. I wouldn't be surprised then, if Draco, Crabbe and Goyle are no longer in Potions.It will depend on what interactions JKR wants to write. Potions without Draco might be a different sort of class. Then again, we don't really know who the Potion Master will be. Just that JKR revealed to us that Theodore Nott had seen death, and we can presume it was his mother from the JKR site, makes me think he might go into Healing. Lots of people think Neville might go that path, but his Potions skills don't seem strong enough. The other one to consider is Ron. Ron says he doesn't fancy Healing because of the high expectations. But that raises two thoughts: Why was he reading that brochure in the first place? And he says he wants to be an Auror, which requires the same Hogwarts courses as Healer does. (or at least the same ones McGonagall recommends.) I'm uncomfortable that Crouch!Moody is the one who put Auror in Harry and Hermione's heads. It doesn't feel good at all. His "praise" is the reason the boys are leaning toward it as a career. I recall Ron was somewhat put out that he wasn't included in the first place. I can imagine both of them starting off toward auror and changing at some point. Quidditch for either of them, but more likely Healer for Ron. Hermione was looking at strange brochures in "Career Advice". Muggle Relations and troll training and department of catastrophes. The last one is really a sort of joke for what will happen later in the book. And the troll one is sort of a joke back to SS/PS. It would fit the story line for her to go into some sort of non-wizarding/wizard relations. The only career I know of that might fit Crabbe and Goyle is "training Security Trolls", but to be honest, a more realistic goal would be "being security trolls". As for the Ministry for the Slytherins or the children of DEs. Keep in mind the ministry isn't the only employeer. But some of the Slytherins would be cunning enough to pull a ministry job off, I think, if that's what they wanted. Potioncat who is bouncing around career/course options with her teens as we speak! From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Apr 1 17:37:04 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:37:04 -0000 Subject: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nrenka" wrote: > > This is an admittedly personal, RL experience-based attempt to > explain something in the books. It makes use of an extended analogy > between the martial art of aikido and the practice of Occlumency, as > Occlumency is presented as having skills at base that are strongly > parallel. It has at least one huge hole, but there are some nice > problems to consider when complaining about said hole. Pippin: I see another, rather larger hole. I believe your point was that aikdo techniques could not be effectively described in writing? It was game of you to try:-) In any case Amazon offers 248 books on Aikido -- surely the Room of Requirement could do as well. I've read only a few and they all stated that they were no substitute for a dedicated instructor, and yet...well, barring divine revelation (and I understand that the ancient martial arts do not) all human knowledge stems ultimately not from instruction but from observation, trial and error -- a rather sobering thought. My contention, which I've made before, is that Snape (and Dumbledore) knew Harry had successfully resisted Imperius and so they thought that Harry already knew how to organize his mind to resist occlumency. Hence Snape's angry statement that Harry is not trying, which Harry inadvertently confirmed by barring Snape's access to his memory of Cho. A fluke, as you say, but Snape wasn't to know that. I agree that the reader is encouraged to compare Snape's technique to Lupin's and to find Snape wanting, but it's also clear to me that JKR has stacked the deck, as usual. A fair comparison would have burdened Lupin with a student who loathed him and everything he stood for, and couldn't see the point of his subject either. Draco, in other words. We are carefully shown that Draco's attitude to Lupin would be the same as Harry's toward Snape, but we're not shown how Lupin coped with it. More evidence that Lupin is being placed on a pedestal so that he can topple off it with a loud and satisfying crash, IMO. Pippin From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 18:16:52 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:16:52 -0000 Subject: Seven Christian Symbols (was The Seven Charms in HPSS) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126943 I think that it is clear that JKR likes the number 7. And the number 7 has a lot of symbolic meaning. I have mentioned before that the number 7 is a big part of the book of Revelation. When the 7th scroll is opened and the 7th Angel blows the trumpet it is the beginning of the end of the world at the final battle at Armageddon. Beyond that the number 7 is in the Bible and in Christian theology in many other ways as well. Let's look at some of these. I am trying to figure out the 7 deadly sins and who represents each one. Maybe some of you can help me with this. Gluttony is obviously Dudley. Anger is Snape. Pride/Vanity is Lockhart. Envy could be Ron, but I do not what one of the trio to represent anything but good, so there has to be someone else for this one. Lust, hummm children's books here. Lust can be something other than sex. Who could it be?? Percy? Greed could be Percy or Lucius. Sloth ??? I think that we have to find one of the negative characters with an over exaggerated trait in order for that person to represent that sin. What does Quirrell, Peter, Bella, Lucius, Umbridge and Rita represent? I think the trait has to be one that obviously gets the person into trouble because these are books to teach children. Dudley and Lockhart, for example, are so very obvious. The 7 Heavely Virtues that are suppose to counter the 7 deadly sins are: humility against pride, kindness against envy, abstinence against gluttony, chastity against lust, patience against anger, liberality against greed, and diligence against sloth. I haven't thought this one through yet, but maybe there are people that represent these too. Neville I think would be humility. Luna maybe patience. The 4 Cardinal Virtues are prudence, temperance, courage, justice. These could represent the 4 Houses. Gryffindor is courage, prudence Ravenclaw, temperance Hufflepuff and Justice as Slytherin. This is just a guess and I don't have a lot to go on here. The trio can be seen as faith (Hermione), hope (Ron) and charity/love (Harry). There are 7 Works of Mercy. I think that we have to see Harry do each of these: Feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, give shelter to strangers, clothe the naked, visit the sick (visit to St. Mungo's), minister to prisoners (helping Sirius/ and Dobby), and bury the dead (maybe we will see Sirius' funeral, or God forbid, someone else's). There are 7 Sacraments in the Church. Some Protestant churches do not put as much emphasis on some of these as the Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican would, but I think they would still be used by Rowling, if she were using any at all. The 7 Sacraments are: Baptism, Confirmation, Penance/Reconciliation, Eucharist, Matrimony, Holy Orders, and Extreme Unction. Baptism is represented in the first book. Penance/Reconciliation could go with book 3, the Eucharist with book 4. (The Goblet of Fire as the Holy Grail.) We haven't seen a wedding yet but many have speculated that it is coming. And I think we all expect someone important (Harry) to die in book 7, and if this happens that would represent Extreme Unction. Christ is the person who comes to: bring glad tidings to the poor (Harry befriends Ron and the Weasley family), proclaim liberty to captives (Sirius), recover of sight of the blind (helps the world to see that LV is really back), let the oppressed go free (Dobby), and to proclaim a year acceptable to the Lord. I am not sure what that last one means. Ok folks please have a go at this. I would love to see what you think. Something to fill our time till book 6. Thanks. Tonks_op From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 18:23:23 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:23:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050401182323.73690.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 126944 --- pippin_999 wrote: > My contention, which I've made before, is that Snape (and > Dumbledore)knew Harry had successfully resisted Imperius and so > they thought that Harry already knew how to organize his mind to > resist occlumency. Hence Snape's angry statement that > Harry is not trying, which Harry inadvertently confirmed by barring > Snape's access to his memory of Cho. A fluke, as you say, but Snape > wasn't to know that. I would agree, with two important riders to the above statement: 1. Dumbledore and Snape assumed that Harry would understand the underlying reason for the lessons - that it was important to keep Voldemort out of his mind. Harry's question during the first lesson that V might make him do things through this mental connection must have reassured them that the kid understood the stakes involved. What they didn't appreciate was that Harry was so bewildered and hurt by being left out of things all year that he would jump on the one instance where he'd been indispensible (saving Arthur) and be naturally reluctant to end the possibility of similar rescues. And that he would be hurt enough by Dumbledore's avoidance of him to resist when he was told to do something without a larger, in-context explanation. Harry was told over and over again why occlumency was important - what he wasn't told was why occlumency was important in the larger context of the Order's fight - and, by extension, what Harry's place was in that fight. 2. Dumbledore and Snape didn't realize that in addition to channeling Voldemort's emotions and longings, Harry was also accessing Voldemort's moods and feelings. Harry didn't realize that the longing to get through the door was Voldemort's longing, not his own, and he never told anyone (except for an aborted effort to tell Sirius after they portkeyed to 12GP) about these strange feelings. So he was being propelled by foreign emotions that no one knew about. > More evidence that Lupin is being placed on a pedestal so that he > can topple off it with a loud and satisfying crash, IMO. So what's the status of the great ESE!Lupin thesis, anyway? Magda __________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 18:28:03 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:28:03 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings (Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126945 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > Weasley deaths (with the exception of Ron and Ginny) have the > advantage of being sad without being too distressing for young > readers. And virtually everyone in the fandom seems to agree that > at least one of them dying is inevitable, so I suppose people are > prepared. > Tonks here: I am not so sure about that. When I thought that Arthur was the one that was going to die I screamed right out loud.. "She can't do that to the children of the world!!!" Killing off a parent, especially one with such a large family, no.. no.. I say... no!! Of course she did say that she didn't care if she had any friends left at the end. I was sure that if she had killed Arthur that there would have been a backlash of fans. How could Molly have ever managed with no work stills, etc. I can see that JKR might kill Bill or Charley and get away with it, or maybe even Percy now that she has painted him in a bad light, but I don't think she can get away with killing the parents or anyone else. Or I am getting depressed already!! I know, I know, a couple of deaths does not a war make. ;-( Better take my blood preasure meds when I start reading the next book. Tonks_op From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 19:00:44 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 19:00:44 -0000 Subject: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126946 > Pippin: > I see another, rather larger hole. I believe your point was that > aikdo techniques could not be effectively described in writing? It > was game of you to try:-) In any case Amazon offers 248 books on > Aikido -- surely the Room of Requirement could do as well. I've > read only a few and they all stated that they were no substitute > for a dedicated instructor, and yet...well, barring divine > revelation (and I understand that the ancient martial arts do not) > all human knowledge stems ultimately not from instruction but from > observation, trial and error -- a rather sobering thought. The best analogy for books on aikido (I recommend Westbrook & Ratti and Saotome for descriptions of technique) are medieval chant manuscripts in neumatic notation. They make absolutely perfect sense if you already know what you're doing. You can't learn how to sing chant from them unless you already know a large number of chants, though. Since I know how irimi-nage generally works (as well as anyone does with The Twenty Year Technique), aikido books are useful; but you can't learn how to do proper irimi-nage from the book. Learning aikido is a mix of instruction and observation, trial and error. What I tried to bring out in my descriptions is that it's a process of *guided* trial and error. I partner up with another person and begin to work on a technique; that person is trying to help me along, and by offering the proper resistance helps me figure out what works and what doesn't. That's why you start off with a little pressure and escalate later. I'm grabbing a total beginner, who is trying to execute a turn with me holding on. There are directions that he can go and directions he can't--my resistance initially points him in the 'right' direction (he turns to the outside because he can't turn inside with my grab), and as he gets better, I get more subtle and tricky to challenge him. Hence, it mixes instruction, observation, and figuring things out. There are ways of teaching that help reduce the amount of time and frustration the trial and error process takes. I would contend that is the area Snape's teaching is ineffectual. > My contention, which I've made before, is that Snape (and > Dumbledore) knew Harry had successfully resisted Imperius and so > they thought that Harry already knew how to organize his mind to > resist occlumency. Hence Snape's angry statement that Harry is not > trying, which Harry inadvertently confirmed by barring Snape's > access to his memory of Cho. A fluke, as you say, but Snape wasn't > to know that. Then I'm simply making the mistake of considering Snape a competent teacher who would insist upon a repeat performance for confirmation. My piano teacher would always say "Can you do it again?", not "You got it once, and that's good enough". If Snape didn't know it was a fluke, it's his fault for not testing to make sure it wasn't. What came to me last night after posting is why your version of the karate analogy is unlikely to work, as well. Someone may well learn a number of kata working by himself from a video. I don't want to see what happens in his first sparring match against an experienced partner, though. Occlumency is a two-person affair, unlike figure skating or casting a Patronus. > More evidence that Lupin is being placed on a pedestal so that he > can topple off it with a loud and satisfying crash, IMO. It's not long until ESE!Lupin has another Hurricane to weather. How nice it is to deal in things that can be conclusively proven or disproven. -Nora notes that the validation of ESE!Lupin might even be as interesting as its invalidation (but her money is more on the latter) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 19:13:34 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 19:13:34 -0000 Subject: Harry's dead (short lifeline) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126947 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "orqad7" wrote: > > > Caesian wrote in #123612: > > In that scenario, when Voldemort dies, so does Harry. > > J.K has given a really big clue which, ... She said in ... her > interviews that a question ... should have been, is not why Harry > lived, but why Voldemort did not die. > > ... I have one thoery of my own and a really good one that > someone else wrote an essay on. My theory is that Voldemort did > not die BECAUSE Harry lived. ... Something to do with LV > transferring some of himself onto Harry. So a part of him still > existed in Harry, therefore he could not die. > bboyminn: Here is an old post (fun but highly speculative) that touches of the mechanism by which Voldemort may have been able to accomplish this task. It not exactly the same but ties in nicely with your theory. Date: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:48 am Subject: Re: LV's experiments - The Deadly Protection http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/122358 If was originally proposted by Tonks, then expanded on by me. > Orqad7 continues: > > The second theory which I wish was my own is along the lines of > the measures LV has taken to ensure he did not die. The general > idea is that he has to kill all blood relatives to become immortal. > (to read the column ..., visit www.hplexicon.com) > bboyminn: Is this 'Kill all the Blood' idea in Lexicon Forums or is it an Essay. Could you give us some more details to help us find it? Since you say 'all blood relatives', doesn't that imply that somehow the Potters, and Voldemort's mother are somehow related? Didn't JKR say something about Harry and Voldemort NOT being related? Perhaps that was with regard to a specific potential relationship (like father, or uncle). > Orqad7 continues: > > One last bit, In OotP when Hagrid returns, he is covered in cuts > and bruises, and uses dragon meat to help the healing process. Is > this one of the 12 uses for dragons blood? Is it one of the steps > to immortality? > > ...edited... > > orqad7 bboyminn: I wonder if this wasn't just JKR's humorous take off on the old beefsteak over a blackeye idea. It's cold so it's soothing, plus the blood stains the bruise red thereby helping hide the injury. Although, I can't deny that the Dragon meat may have had some healing proterties that go beyond the standard beefsteak on a blackeye. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From ejblack at rogers.com Fri Apr 1 20:07:02 2005 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 20:07:02 -0000 Subject: Dragon meat for healing WARNING : real world gross fact In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126948 > > > Orqad7 continues: > > > > One last bit, In OotP when Hagrid returns, he is covered in cuts > > and bruises, and uses dragon meat to help the healing process. > bboyminn: > > I wonder if this wasn't just JKR's humorous take off on the old > beefsteak over a blackeye idea. It's cold so it's soothing, plus the > blood stains the bruise red thereby helping hide the injury. There is ANOTHER reason to use meat on an injury. That is if you bind raw meat over a injury that breaks the skin, it will attract flies which will lay their eggs in it. The eggs will hatch to maggots and maggots eat ONLY dead tissue. If infection has set in, the maggots will clean the wound of any dead or decaying flesh. It is a treatment which it still used in hot countries such as Africa and was used in the trenches of the first World War. Maggots are also used to clean wounds on diabetics, though they are lab-bred and placed on with tweezers, not by way of raw meat. I think in the case of Hagrid though, he is using the dragon meat for some special properties or effects of dragonkind. Which leads tothe thought, we have been talking of careers for the Hogwort students. Is there a career as a supplier for herbs and bits and pieces of magical animals for the Healers? Would the dragon meat come from a wild dragon or as a side product of the dragonskin leather industry? Do they farm dragons or is there an elite group of hunters who supple the trade. Jeanette Jeanette From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 21:08:51 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 21:08:51 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings (Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126949 > Tonks wrote: > > I am not so sure about that. When I thought that Arthur was the one that was going to die I screamed right out loud.. "She can't do that to the children of the world!!!" Killing off a parent, especially one with such a large family, no.. no.. I say... no!! Of course she did say that she didn't care if she had any friends left at the end. > I was sure that if she had killed Arthur that there would have been a backlash of fans. How could Molly have ever managed with no work stills, etc. > > I can see that JKR might kill Bill or Charley and get away with it, or maybe even Percy now that she has painted him in a bad light, but I don't think she can get away with killing the parents or anyone else. Or I am getting depressed already!! I know, I know, a couple of deaths does not a war make. ;-( Better take my blood preasure > meds when I start reading the next book. Hannah: Well, she's got to kill some people. Now, so far the only characters we've really known that have died are Cedric and Sirius. When she killed Cedric, I must admit, I thought 'well, she wimped out on that one.' After all, she'd told us it was going to be a major character, and a lot of fans were guessing Hagrid, Ron, Hermione... no one even considered someone who had only been mentioned briefly twice in POA. Not really a major character. But then she killed Sirius, who in some ways *was* a parent, at least to Harry. And I would consider him to be a major character. She's not afraid to kill main characters. Also, JKR has already addressed the issues of dead and permanently insane parents... I don't think she'd stop at killing either Molly or Arthur (but not both, because I do think that would be too much). I don't personally believe that JKR will kill any of the trio, or the other principal children, though I know a lot of people disagree. But anyone else, unfortunately, is fair game. And bear in mind that JKR herself seems to be most fond of Lupin and Hagrid, not the Weasley parents. If it came to a choice, I reckon she'd let Arthur have a hero's death rather than killing one of them. Just my opinion. Don't get depressed, though, Tonks. I don't think the books will have a sad ending, I reckon it'll be upbeat. Hannah From klevasseur at earthlink.net Fri Apr 1 21:49:36 2005 From: klevasseur at earthlink.net (ms_luna_knows) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 21:49:36 -0000 Subject: Seven Christian Symbols (was The Seven Charms in HPSS) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126950 --> I haven't been here in a while, but this post interests me Tonks, so I thought I'd have a go at it. >> snip> > I am trying to figure out the 7 deadly sins and who represents each > one. Maybe some of you can help me with this. Gluttony is obviously > Dudley. Anger is Snape. Pride/Vanity is Lockhart. Envy could be > Ron, but I do not what one of the trio to represent anything but > good, so there has to be someone else for this one. Lust, hummm > children's books here. Lust can be something other than sex. Who > could it be?? Percy? Greed could be Percy or Lucius. Sloth ??? I agree that Dudley represents gluttony, but I think Snape's anger comes from Envy so I put Envy with Snape, Pride/Vanity could be Lockhart, but it could also be Draco. They are both so vain and prideful it's hard to chose one, but I believe I'll put Draco with Pride/ Vanity only because he's a major character throughout the entire series. Anger...this one is tough, LV is one major angry dude, but his anger seems to come from so many different places that it is hard to place. But I think I'll put Anger with LV. Lust...that is Lucius Malfoy..he lusts for power and prestige...going way beyond greed. Although I agree that Percy would be a good fit for that, but Lucius just drips with it in my opinion. Greed..I don't think Percy is so much greedy as he is vain, he wants to go above his present station in life that doesn't make him greedy, at least not in my opinion. What about Pettigrew as the greedy one. Greed makes one completly selfish...but that fits Percy... It's either Percy or Peter as Greed. Sloth is pretty easy to fit, Crabbe or Goyle... That's all I can come up with at the moment. What a great post Tonks! Ms. Luna From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 22:11:59 2005 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 23:11:59 +0100 (BST) Subject: The Weasleys as bodily regions (was Hans-Pineal) Message-ID: <20050401221200.63202.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 126951 Many thanks to catkind for the post with lots of questions about my theory of the Weasleys symbolising regions of the body. I think the best thing to do is explain the story of my discovery and how I came to my conclusions. You can then judge for yourself whether those conclusions are valid. I just want to refer back to my post 107405 where I told the group about my recognition of the Path of Alchemical Liberation in Harry Potter. Thats my starting point for all my posts over the years. As Ive said before, I feel it is my duty as a member to tell this group about what I think Harry Potter is based on. The whole purpose of Liberating Alchemy is to turn a temporary tent (the mortal personality) into a divine, indestructible, four-dimensional Temple. In this sense the human personality, with the four bodies and the three foci of consciousness, is a three-dimensional blueprint of a four-dimensional human being. The physical body, the etheric body, the astral body, the mental body and the three centres of consciousness are transmuted and transformed, organ by organ, atom by atom, into divine, indestructible counterparts. When I first read Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets I immediately recognised the process of liberation as taught by the Rosicrucian Alchemists. This is a process in which the new soul-force (Harry), born out of the divine spirit-spark (Lily) in the heart (Godrics Hollow) enters the head and then builds a new serpent-fire in the spinal column. The serpent-fire is a fiery astral force in the spinal cord and is the basis for the consciousness. The purpose of alchemy at this first stage is to build a new serpent-fire which will form the basis of a new consciousness. This new serpent-fire will be immortal and divine, and hence the new consciousness will be. Try to imagine the new soul-fire as a luminous electric force gradually coming down the right cord of the sympathetic nerve. As it goes down it also travels into the sympathetic nerves which connect with the plexuses. The effect of this glowing fiery light is to raise the vibration of these plexuses, gradually closing them off to the influences of our fallen universe, whose essence is symbolised by Voldemort. This fiery prana does 3 things at the same time: it changes the plexuses, it slows down the rotation of the chakras, and it influences the endocrine glands. The plexuses in the breast are extremely relevant, as the teachings of liberating alchemy say (symbolically) that a Grail is constructed there. The three plexuses in the breast become capable of storing the Blood of Christ, by which I mean an astral force given to the alchemist by the universal Christ-spirit. The Grail legends in my opinion are references to this part of the reconstruction of the divine human temple. In fact this is the purpose of life on earth and the purpose of all esoteric impulses which give rise to exoteric religions: the breaking down of the old temple and the rebuilding of it in three days (stages). Im talking of something that is so supernal, so breathtakingly wonderful, and so pure and holy that I cant express my marvel at the whole thing. The new divine prana, i.e. the heavenly soul-fire (Harry) continues down the string of the sympathetic nerve, slowing down the chakras so they suck in less energy from our fallen universe. All the plexuses are purified and the endocrine organs regulated so they work more efficiently, preventing extremes in the life of the alchemist. In other words everything becomes more harmonious and gentle in his/her life. The body becomes more serene. Finally the soul-fire reaches the sacral plexus. It meets three things there: the kundalini, the root chakra, and the mirror of the subconscious mind. It defeats the kundalini, gains mastery over the subconscious mind, and brings the root chakra to a standstill, after which it reverses its rotation. The new soul-force then ascends along the left string of the sympathetic nerve and reverses the rotation of all the other chakras. This means they suck in only the energy of the Sixth Cosmic Plane, the world of Christ. The endocrine glands only produce hormones according to the spiritual needs of the alchemist, and the plexuses are now totally pure and form the basis for a new body which is indestructible and divine. The sexual energy is converted into creative energy, the metabolism is regulated totally, and in the purified breast the Holy Grail is able to receive, retain and radiate the Blood of Christ. The plexus in the throat, together with the throat chakra and the thyroid gland, form a new faculty of speech, which is the creative fiat. This is symbolised as the sword of the Knight of the Holy Grail, and also as the sword in the mouth of the Son of Man in Johns vision on Patmos. When the soul-fire reaches the pineal gland this is opened to the Holy Spirit, and the new consciousness is born. However the old serpent-fire is still burning in the spinal cord. This fire is put out and replaced by the new serpent-fire. The central nervous system is now under divine control and the new soul is conscious in the old body. This can now systematically be broken up and replaced by the new temple. The process described above, the process of the formation of the new serpent-fire as the basis of the new consciousness, is called transmutation. The process of building the new temple, which comes when the new soul is conscious, is called transfiguration. I have now described the bare bones of the process of building the new serpent-fire, the process of transmutation. With this I deem my promise to you some weeks ago to explain to you the process of liberation to be discharged. As I said, this is the purpose of life on earth and every human being on this planet will one day achieve this, even if it takes a million incarnations. I recognise Harry Potter as presenting this process in a veiled form, and so its obviously extremely probable that the chakras will be symbolised somehow. In fact its quite unlikely theyre NOT symbolised in Harry Potter, as their reversal is essential to the basic transmutation process. In my character discussion posts I have pointed out that Draco (meaning serpent) symbolises the old serpent-fire and the spinal cord. On the left and right of the serpent-fire are the two strings of the sympathetic nerves. Crabbe and Goyle personify these. In Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets we see Harry and Ron taking polyjuice potion and changing into Crabbe and Goyle. I see that as symbolising the new soul-fire using the strings of the sympathetic nerve to get to the sacral plexus. Draco and Harry are enemies, as Draco is the old serpent-fire, which is poured into the spinal cord before birth by the microcosmic consciousness, personified by Voldemort. However its the brain (Lucius) that is under the direct control of Voldemort. The spinal cord is just a son of the brain. The basilisk is obviously the kundalini, and Tom Riddle, as the memory in the diary symbolises the subconscious mind. As this is radiated into the spine of the foetus before birth this is obviously the essence of Voldemort, brilliantly symbolised as a younger Voldemort. Before I made my discovery of what the Weasleys symbolise I asked myself what Ginny must personify. What is at the bottom of the spine, is red in some way, stops being conscious in some way, and has six siblings? It seemed fairly obvious that the root chakra fits this description well. It is at the bottom of the spine, is red, stops rotating at the crucial time, and his six partners. I have used Leadbeaters book as my basis for the colours and the general description. This does not agree with the colours youre referring to, namely the colours of the spectrum. Ill list the colours later; suffice to say that the root chakra consists of four petals, two red and two orange. It looks fiery red as a whole. I interpret Ginnys unconsciousness as the period when the chakra ceases its rotation. The resumption of the rotation in the opposite direction is symbolised by Ginny waking up. I then had a look at the other Weasleys and the properties of the chakras and found that some Weasleys fitted well, others not as well. However when I took into account the endocrine glands and the plexuses, I found the accuracy with which everything fitted rather spine-tingling. So instead of saying the Weasleys personify the chakras, Im saying they personify systems which reside in certain areas of the body, and which INCLUDE the chakras, the endocrine glands, and the plexuses. Ron fits the spleen-liver system extremely well, taking into account his middle name (Bilius bilious bile liver), his ownership of Scabbers as the blood-ego living in the spleen-liver system, and his pre-occupation with food. The spleen chakra is all the colours of the spectrum. Fred and George fit very well into the adrenal glandsnavel chakra system. The chakra has two colours and ten petals, alternately red and green. There are two adrenal glands, and theyre sitting on the kidneys. Fred and George are mentioned twice in connection with toilet seats and twice with toilets. The stem of the navel chakra is also third from the bottom. Percy gave me quite a shock when I started investigating him. I was reading a book about the reversal of the chakras to reach liberation. There is a chapter about the two immortal faculties mentioned in the Corpus Hermeticum of Hermes Trismegistus. The chapter states that the liberated alchemist has two divine faculties which make him a master over all evil. These are the absolutely pure heart and the Speech or Word. The purified heart is symbolised by the impenetrable shield of the Knight of the Holy Grail. This gets back to the plexuses I mentioned earlier. Then the chapter suddenly went on to Parsifal and how he went to the Golden city, only to find it an illusion. To my shock I realised that Percy is just a shortened form of the English equivalent of Parsifal, and that the Ministry of Magic is full of golden doors, gates, etc. It is obvious (to me at any rate) that the legend of Parsifal symbolises the seeker who is trying to attain the purified heart so that it can become a Grail. The golden city obviously symbolises things of great earthly value. The lesson is that Parsifal has to learn that the heart must be purified of all earthly desires before he can find, i.e. construct the Grail. We know Percy is at present pursuing his ambitions in the Ministry, which fits 100%. What is also very striking, and very important to the seeker, is that Percy is turning against Harry. This symbolises that when the heart is filled with ambition, it turns its back on the new soul, which is the only thing worth living for. If we see Percy as the heart-sanctuary rather than just the chakra, it fits perfectly. The colour of the heart chakra is gold, and in fact it looks a bit like a small golden shield in front of the chest. It has 12 petals or divisions. As I said, the thymus (not thyroid sorry) produces a hormone which transmits the fiery soul-prana to the head via the upper blood circulation. It was Percy who took Harry up the tower in book 1. OK we dont know anything about Charlie but the next bodily system is the throat-system, with the thyroid, the cervical plexus and the thyroid gland. Well have to wait for book 6 or 7. The throat chakra has 16 spokes which are bluish and greenish with a silvery sheen. If Bill is the crown region of the head, he will obviously symbolise the crown chakra in some way. This chakra has 960 petals plus a central whirlpool with 12 petals. The large area is predominantly violet, the central area whitish gold. Maybe this is Bills ponytail. It struck me very forcibly that the pituitary gland has two lobes which are extremely significant in the process of alchemy. Leadbeater shows the brow chakra as having 96 petals, and divided vertically into two colours one red, the other indigo. This is a perfect fit for the parents of a family. The red hair is not important, but I think its a bit of humour on Jos part to use the red to colour Arthurs hair. There you have my conclusions and how I arrived at them. To prove that Im not making this up as I go along I will give you the titles of some books which deal with these things in great detail. They are all by the 20th Century Rosicrucian, Jan van Rijckenborgh 1. The Universal Gnosis the chapters called The Seven liberating deeds deal with the plexuses. 2. The Coming New Man Part I deals with the new serpent-fire. 3. The Gnosis in Present-Day Manifestation deals with the defeat of the kundalini. 4. The Egyptian Arch-Gnosis Vol. III deals with the chakras and their reversal, and mentions Parsifal and the Sword. These books are obtainable from Amazon. I will start to answer your questions now. catkind: I have to say I find the fact that you have two things symbolising the pineal gland (and this isn't the only time you've had two symbols for the same thing) an indication that maybe just maybe you're getting a little carried away with your analogies. Hans: Well I didnt write Harry Potter! There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that the pineal gland is symbolised by Dumbledores office. I have already explained that. Until book 7 comes along well have to see what Bill is going to symbolise, but I feel 99.9% certain Bill will symbolise the pineal gland-crown chakra system. I would tend to think more in the direction of the chakra, while Dumbledores office is the physical gland. Jo often uses different symbols for the same thing. The result is that this illuminates the subject under discussion from different angles. We get to see it from different points of view. Harry Potter isnt fiction but nor is it a pure, mathematical logic puzzle. Its an allegory of the process of liberation and everything is presented in a very dramatic, exaggerated way, with lots of highlighting of various spiritual facts. Its not like a photograph with everything the right size, shape and colour. Its more like a cartoon drawing with the characters and objects outlined in thick black lines, sometimes pulled out of shape to fit the story, or larger than life, or squashed in some way. To me the genius of Harry Potter is that someone has been able to put the most sacred facts of transmutation and transfiguration, only taught in the mystery schools up to now, into a story that is so well written, so exciting and yet so real-life that hardly anyone can see what its all based on. One very clear example of using different symbols for the same thing is dragons and giants. Hagrid loves both (or at least Grawp) and they both symbolise humanity. The dragon draws attention to the serpent-fire in the human being (Draco again) and how dangerous we are in our thoughts, actions, emotions, desires, our radiations and our waste-products. The giant symbolises our potential greatness, the power we can develop if we wake up (Grawp was asleep at first), and yet our clumsiness, our insensitivity, our aggressiveness, etc. Harry Potter is telling us we are dangerous serpents but also titans of great potential. You may think thats stupid, but I think thats exquisite! This is why I love Harry Potter with a spiritual intensity that cant be put into words. The beauty of the symbolism, the Truth expressed, the elegance of it all is quite mind boggling yet intensely heart-warming. Another example is the heart. The heart (or the breast) is symbolised by at least FIVE symbols: Harry, the Room of Love, Godrics Hollow, Percy, and Lily. Each symbol highlights a different aspect. In my past posts I have discussed all these, but to summarise: Godrics Hollow: the hollow place where the inner God lives. Lily: the eternal principle asleep in the heart (until the hart comes). Harry: the new soul, born in the heart, but soon spreading to the whole body. The Room of Love: This draws attention to the vast treasure house of love that can open up when the new soul (Harry) has become mature enough. Its another aspect of Lily. Maybe Jo will put her body in there, as Ive said in previous posts. Percy: the breast with the three plexuses, the heart chakra and the thymus. The heart is also the seat of the emotional I, which is due to be liberated in book 6. In fact the pineal gland is already symbolised, I believe, by two different things. Not only is it Dumbledores office, but I believe Madeye Moodys rotating eye is a third eye. Catkind: I'll happily eat my words if a concrete connection between Bill Weasley and Dumbledore's office turns up in the last two books. (Though I can't really imagine how it would. Bill Weasley for the new Headmaster?) will you eat yours if it doesn't? Hans: I cant see any connection between Bill and Dumbledores office either just now. I certainly wont have any trouble in admitting Im wrong. I probably am wrong about some minor things. Its possible that I have Bill and Charlie back to front for example. However when you ask if Ill eat my words youre putting this whole thing in a context I dont want to enter into. I dont want to enter the arena of the ego. I dont want this to be a confrontation of whos right and whos wrong, with the loser having to eat humble pie. As I say its my right and duty to point out what I recognise as the matrix on which Harry potter is written. Of course I expect rejection from many people. I expect rejection especially from traditional church goers as Im going against the beliefs of two thousand years. The people Im aiming at are the ones who are searching with an open mind for the true inspiration of Harry Potter. I dont expect any acceptance without people doing some critical examination of what Im saying, but people do occasionally write to me privately telling me they find some food for thought in my posts, and thats all I can really expect. I absolutely dont want to get into an arguing mode, i.e. trying to convince or persuade people. Im just pointing out the many close similarities between liberating alchemy and Harry Potter. Although the majority of people may not agree with me, Ill have a great sense of fulfilment if just one or two people are touched by what I believe is the foundation of Harry Potter. I would ask you earnestly to accept that it's important not to drag holy things down into the muck by exposing them to ridicule. The motto of The Alchemical Wedding is: Ne margaritas obiice porcis, seu asino substernere rosas. Catkind: Actually, a lot of traditions have the crown chakra associated to the pituitary gland and the brow chakra to the pineal gland. (There is a good explanation of this at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chakras ) If you adopted that system you could have Molly and Arthur at the top after all! Thanks for that link; its very interesting. Theres absolutely no doubt that the alchemical teachings say that the crown chakra and the pineal gland are linked; in fact they are different aspects of the same organ. Im not interested in having Arthur and Molly at the top. What youre saying here is that Im trying to make Harry Potter fit my theories at any price. What does it matter whether Bill is at the top? People often say to me I should shut up about the liberating teachings until book 7 is finished. Then Ill really know what Im talking about. But then people will think Im making it up. It is precisely by saying what things symbolise BEFORE Jo makes it obvious, that I can prove that what Im saying is true. Thats not persuading people, thats proving that I really know what Im talking about. Obviously no ones going to pay attention to some one who doesnt know what hes talking about. This is why I predicted in April 2003 what was coming in future books, and I was very happy to see many of my predictions verified even as early as book 5. Catkind: The gonads are more separate than the two lobes of the pituitary gland, yet Ginny doesn't seem to be twins. Hans: Yes, naturally Ive thought of that. I surmise that Jos task is to write a sensible, logical story with a credible plot line. Two sets of twins in one family sounds a bit far-fetched. It is also important that Ginny be infatuated with Harry. This makes the point that there can be no sexual relationships on the Path of Liberation. This is a point also made in the Alchemical Wedding. The guests there are given the opportunity of sleeping with a beautiful virgin, but when they hold a raffle all the men get men. It will not have escaped the notice of most members that Harry does not return Ginnys infatuation. In fact when the soul-fire does reach the sacral plexus the sexual drive is converted into creative energy. Sex is a necessity in this fallen universe to keep producing new physical bodies for reincarnation. Obviously when one has an indestructible body theres no need for a system of reproduction. So sorry, folks, theres no sex in heaven! Catkind: In particular, biologically speaking, the solar plexus and spleen are above the navel and lumbar region. Why do you have them below? Hans: In Leadbeaters book (1972 edition) theres a colour plate opposite page 40. This shows the plexuses and the chakras in the body from the side. The chakras look like convolvuli, as I said, and most of these stick out from the spine fairly horizontally. The navel chakra however has a longer stem and appears to droop below the spleen chakra. Seen from the spine its higher than the spleen chakra, but seen from the front its slightly lower. catkind: Gred's Weasley-jumper colour is blue with yellow writing. They're a two-man rainbow! I don't think wearing green once gives them a serious association with the colour. And I repeat, everyone has red hair, so that proves nothing. Hans: I agree seeing them once only in green proves nothing. Thats why I didnt mention this in my main post. I just thought it was an amusing coincidence and I mentioned it as an afterthought in my answer to Rita. I suppose as another weak afterthought I could say that what their mother gives them is not their choice. They CHOSE to wear green that day. But Ill leave that. Catkind: Another question: What symbol do you actually mean with the green and red petals? What are the corresponding symbols for the other chakras? Hans: The word chakra means wheel. Its divided into areas which look like the spokes of a wheel. Or if you think of it as a flower you can call these petals. If you look at a peeled orange from the angle of where the little stem used to be, you can see the lines radiating from the centre. Thats what I mean by petals. You seem to like tables, so heres one for the divisions and colours: Root 4 orange & red Spleen 6 all the spectrum except indigo Navel 10 fred & green Heart 12 gold Throat 16 silvery blue & green Brow 96 - 48 red, 48 indigo Crown 972 purple & gold I have asked our computer expert to place pictures of the chakras on our website. I hope theyll be there in a few days. They will be on this page: http://www.harrypotterforseekers.com/symbols/weasleys.php catkind: But the heart chakra has to be about love and emotion. Percy is not emotional at all compared to his siblings. Again, the association with ambition is new to me. Hans: I agree I didnt explain this fully, but thats OK; its great to get questions asking for further explanation. Ive tried to answer this question in my explanation of the process of transmutation above. Im saying that Percy symbolises the heart-sanctuary of the human temple. This sanctuary is the abode of the emotional-I or consciousness. What Jo is saying here is that when the heart (in the broad sense) is filled with earthly desires, it closes itself off to the new soul (Harry). This is why Percy warns Ron about not associating with the Potter boy. Earthly desires are symbolised by ambition, which Percy demonstrates with admirable skill, youll agree. When I saw Parsifal and the golden city mentioned in this book about the reversal of the chakras, I nearly fell off my chair, I assure you! Yet there it is in the fourth book in the above list. I feel sure Percy will see his ambition shattered in book 6 or 7, and I feel its more likely to be in book 6 because thats going to symbolise Harrys liberation of the emotional-I. I cant visualise exactly what Jo is going to do, but I imagine something like the new minister giving Percy his just deserts and making all his ambitions go up in smoke. Percy will go through much bitterness and suffering, but at the end of the book hell come back to Harry. Voldemort and Harry will probably have their annual confrontation in or near the Room of Love, and Harry will win. I suspect Lilys body is in the room. My evidence for this is that there is a similar room in the Alchemical Wedding, and Venus is in a state of deep sleep there; in a kind of coma. Something like Briar Rose (Sleeping Beauty). When Christian Rosycross sees her he is punished (ha ha) by being made the next gatekeeper (like Hagrid). Perhaps Jo will justify Lily lying in the Room of Love, by the Ministry of Magic using her to study love. They could argue something like, It was her love that defeated the Dark Lord, so lets keep her body preserved in there for study. I used to think perhaps Lily was in a coma, but apparently Jo has said she is definitely dead. I think Percy will do something wonderful for Harry (as all the Weasleys will) and perhaps as a Ministry official he will help Harry enter the Room. >>Hans (to Rita): It's great to know someone is reading my posts with enough interest to ask questions (and not just trying to knock them down).<< catkind: Maybe I'm imagining it, but you sound a little indignant there, Hans. Hans: No no, just a sardonic smile. Just resignation at the inevitable. To finish with Im pasting underneath here a short summary from my website of what I theorise will happen to the Weasleys at the end of the story. Of course it wont happen exactly like this, but if you combine what Im saying there with what it symbolises in the actual process of transmutation, Im sure youll find my story roughly confirmed at the end of Harry Potter. I suspect the sequence Ive given to events could be quite wrong. Extract from Harry Potter for Seekers: When the new soul-force enters the pineal gland, the Holy Spirit of God enters and performs the alchemical wedding of the Spirit, the Soul and the Personality. This creates a new consciousness. If we see the Weasleys as symbolising the organs involved in this process we can imagine to some extent how JK Rowling will put this into her story. Will it be something like this? Voldemort has taken the Weasleys captive in the Chamber of Secrets or a similar place and they are all unconscious. Snape and Lupin have united to save them, but have both died. With the aid of Crabbe or Goyle, Harry goes down to save them. Voldemort promises Harry that he, Voldemort, will spare the Weasleys and make Harry his second in command if he will acknowledge that Voldemort is greater than he. Harry absolutely rejects Voldemort for the last time. Peter Pettigrew repays Harry his debt and both Voldemort and Peter vanish in a puff of smoke. The Weasleys wake up and give great gifts of gratitude to Harry. Percy gives Harry a golden shield and Charlie given him a two edged sword. They go up to the ground level with the aid of Crabbe or Goyle. They head for Dumbledore's office. Neville Longbottom makes a vital contribution in the final stages. He gives Dumbledore the opportunity to go down to the Chamber of Secrets and then go back up to his office. When they unite in Dumbledore's office Draco finally turns around and becomes Harry's friend - or he dies in the process. In the final ceremony there is an alchemical wedding to unite Harry Ron and Hermione for ever. Bill Weasley plays a unique and essential role in this. However after the climax and the joy, something happens which suddenly changes everything. Harry ends up taking Hagrid's place as keeper of the Keys at Hogwarts. The story ends with Harry ferrying first years across the lake. "if I talk too freely about [if I believe in God] I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books." JK Rowling _____________________________________ Hans Andra see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://www.harrypotterforseekers.com Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 1 22:57:53 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 22:57:53 -0000 Subject: News! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126952 Hey everyone, you have to go to HPANA for the news on Mark Evans! He's back. Here's the link. http://www.hpana.com/af/2005/ Oh what a fool I was to believe JKR! Potioncat From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 2 00:10:59 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:10:59 -0000 Subject: The Seven Charms in HPSS In-Reply-To: <1ef.38f034dc.2f7d61f7@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126953 Danielle wrote: > Miss Nitpicky here, but the devil's snare didn't cure those who were > petrified in book two, that was the mandrakes. So task 2 the devil's snare really didn't have anything to do for the plot of book 2. I was confused when I first read that, too. If you re-read it, I think you'll see that "B.G." was showing a possible connection between the 7 tasks and the 7 books. The 2nd task was the Devil's Snare, the 2nd book had the Mandrakes (Herbology). Hope that helps. Ravenclaw Bookworm From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 2 00:23:57 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:23:57 -0000 Subject: Why did Hermione Lie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126954 > Bookworm: > Hermione could have easily said that the boys had come to help her > without the story about having gone to look for it herself, but the > story seems to be more in keeping with her personality. She tries > to be "Little Miss Perfect" so she wouldn't want to admit > that she was crying in the bathroom. Going after a troll by herself > is much more decisive ? crying in the loo is wimpy. Antosha: So she should have told the truth? "Well, Professor, I've been in here crying since this afternoon because Ron and Harry--well, really, to be precise, Ron--said some horrid, hurtful things about me after I tried to help him in Charms. But they came and helped me when the troll came in, so now I've decided to forgive them." I can't see that getting anyone but Hermione off the hook for being where they weren't supposed to be--the students were told to stay with the prefects and go back to their dormitories, and I can't see McGonagall being terribly sympathetic to a couple of eleven-year- olds who made a classmate weep through dinner. I don't see it painting Hermione herself in the best light, and we all must admit that she has a certain amount of pride. And I certainly don't see it leading to Hermione become Ron and Harry's best friend. Which was, after all, the main dramatic purpose of the scene. Bookworm: I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. I said above that Hermione *could* have said the boys had come to get her. What I implied but didn't specify was that McGonagall's first question would probably have been, "what were you doing here during the feast?" Since she wouldn't want to admit to crying and hurt feelings, she made up a story that makes her look strong. Does that make more sense? Ravenclaw Bookworm From ABadgerFan2 at msn.com Sat Apr 2 00:44:03 2005 From: ABadgerFan2 at msn.com (abadgerfan2) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 00:44:03 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126955 I recently read a crtique of the "Potter" books that caused me to briefly question whether, as a parent, I should be endorsing the series as whole-heartedly as I have. I remain a big fan, but I'd like to at least expose others to a few of the critiques and hear their views on such criticisms that I saw. I'll start this message w just one such point! The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you best." This cynical attitude of it's only wrong if you get caught may well describe the "real world", but the argument is do we want to teach our youngsters such values? The critiquer points to the amount of rule-breaking and lying by Harry and his pals, the gradual corrupting of Hermoine to share such situational values, and even Dumbledore's rewarding or overlooking Harry's blatant disobedience to rules, while acknowledging (in Book 4) his own ambiguous moral compass ("It is my belief . . . that truth is generally preferable to lies.") Your views????? From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sat Apr 2 01:07:32 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 01:07:32 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126956 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" wrote: > > I recently read a crtique of the "Potter" books that caused me to > briefly question whether, as a parent, I should be endorsing the > series as whole-heartedly as I have. I remain a big fan, but I'd like to at least expose others to a few of the critiques and hear their views on such criticisms that I saw. I'll start this message w just one such point! > > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you best." Valky: As honour among theives, you seem to imply I think. Though I have always personally had an affinity for Pirate codes of ethos I am not actually trying to espouse them when I say this.. I promise. My veiw on the rule breaking in HP is that it's not so much a rebellion on Morals as it is a questioning of morality. It's fairly obvious that when HRH, DD, The OOtP choose to break some rule there is no ambiguity as to what moral basis that they propound their rebellion on. For example the notion of protecting Sirius Black, a major breaking of the rules, harbouring a wanted criminal, but is it morally ambiguous to the reader? No. It is clear to the reader that a far greater injustice is the soul sucking of an innocent man because noone was brave enough to challenge the flawed system that convicted him. I have no qualms wholeheartedly endorsing this subject to my children, and I do wonder does the writer of this critique you're speaking of put the kind of stock in tradition that leads to injustices like Sirius 12 year sentence in Azkaban and Pettigrews exploits? Because precisely this loquacious obsession with debased traditions is, for me, a far more pressing moral question. Valky From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 01:59:28 2005 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 01:59:28 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126957 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" > wrote: > > > > I recently read a crtique of the "Potter" books that caused me to > > briefly question whether, as a parent, I should be endorsing the > > series as whole-heartedly as I have. > > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience > to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you > best." Annemehr: If you think about it even a little bit, you'll realise that's actually a wildly inaccurate assessment of the way rulebreaking is presented in the books. Further, after looking at your Yahoo profile, the feeling that I'm being baited has increased (and it is April 1st, after all). Still, the question does come up; I've seen it often enough, so I may as well answer it. > Valky: > My veiw on the rule breaking in HP is that it's not so much a > rebellion on Morals as it is a questioning of morality. It's fairly > obvious that when HRH, DD, The OOtP choose to break some rule there is > no ambiguity as to what moral basis that they propound their rebellion > on. > > I have no qualms wholeheartedly endorsing this subject to my children, > and I do wonder does the writer of this critique you're speaking of > put the kind of stock in tradition that leads to injustices like > Sirius 12 year sentence in Azkaban and Pettigrews exploits? Because > precisely this loquacious obsession with debased traditions is, for > me, a far more pressing moral question. > > Valky Annemehr: I think Valky has hit the nail on the head. People in authority often think they cannot afford to sanction any thought of rulebreaking whatever, in case their authority is undermined. But to refuse to admit any moral basis for rulebreaking is to set imperfect codes of conduct above justice, conscience, and even common sense. Even the most well-intentioned of authority figures have no hope of writing a set of rules to cover every circumstance, so there will inevitably be cases where following the rules is wrong. Worse yet, of course, is that the rules are not always made by the well-intentioned, but by the arbitrary or the power-hungry -- and "I was just following orders" is not going to be any excuse for those who do wrong in keeping them. We see examples of all of this in the Harry Potter books. On the other side, the main characters are not perfect. Sometimes they do break rules that they should keep. I don't see the fact that they don't always get caught as an endorsement for this type of behaviour, especially since there are very often consequences given, whether natural or in the form of punishment. Of course, children must usually follow the rules of their parents and teachers, and later the laws of their communities. But it is dangerous to make that an absolute value for them, for the sake of keeping your control. The difficult, but morally right, path is to balance teaching proper respect for authority with fostering the ability to consider the greater moral good. In the Harry Potter books, the main characters are presented with situations where the rules won't work rather more often than we who are in Western society usually are. However, I agree with J K Rowling's assessment that "these are very moral books," and I have no hesitation in sharing them with my children. Better? Annemehr Truth *is* generally preferable to lies. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 02:26:23 2005 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (Charme) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 21:26:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters References: Message-ID: <004f01c5372b$5daf5420$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 126958 "abadgerfan2" < > wrote: >> >> The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience > to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you > best." > > Valky: > I have no qualms wholeheartedly endorsing this subject to my children, > and I do wonder does the writer of this critique you're speaking of > put the kind of stock in tradition that leads to injustices like > Sirius 12 year sentence in Azkaban and Pettigrews exploits? Because > precisely this loquacious obsession with debased traditions is, for > me, a far more pressing moral question. Charme: Danger, Will Robinson. Soapbox alert! :) Now that you've been warned, I can go on...... Iconoblog is not an article, I think. It is a pastor's blog. Just this girl's opinion - obviously the pastor who wrote the criticism didn't read the books in full context and think about them from a philosophical perspective. Instead, he used the basis of religion: other religious leaders have published books (not blog entries) which outline the exact opposite as this man does and supports the books' moral implications in line with Bible teachings. Let's try reformulating that sentence to "the books clearly teach that obedience to rules or morality is required as a general rule of thumb, however rules can be excepted by extenuating circumstances such as threat of death or the greater good of all." The original sentence you quoted can imply that there are "rules" to morality - whose interpretation of morality is that exactly, a religious one? The word "morality" doesn't even belong in the same sentence, IMO, as some rules have little to do with morality and moral values are interpreted differently by each person for himself. Mind you, these are characters who are kids, not adults who have the benefit of experience to guide their judgements, so they are going to make mistakes and get in trouble just like I recall I did as a kid. This point resonates with me, as my mother repeatedly drilled into my head that sooner or later, you *have* to stand up and be counted for something, and the easy solution (following the rules, for example, when you know something attributed to the outcome of a rule is wrong, wrong, wrong) isn't always the *right* one. (God bless Mom, if any of you tell her I actually REMEMBER what she taught me...well...where is the nearest rock I can hide under?!?!?." :)) When we screwed up with the rules, my mother always asked us "why." The "why" can be more important than the rule you broke. I might suggest the reading of Harry Potter and Philosophy: If Aristotle Ran Hogwarts or John Granger's book - perhaps that might help you as you come across, IMO, such limited views on the subject. Charme From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Apr 2 05:49:23 2005 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 05:49:23 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126959 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "megs0124" wrote: > Plus, if Harry > takes potions, which I believe he will from the cover art I have > seen of the UK Adult cover. It is of a torn and battered advanced > potions book. We might have Harry taking potions and/OR we are > going to find out a lot more about Professor Snape (Which I hope > for- he is great, mean but great). > > Megan And based on that, am I wrong in thinking that advanced potions would have to be a pretty major theme in the book? Otherwise, why would that be all alone on the cover in such an ominous way? Allison From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 08:08:52 2005 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (Andromeda) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 08:08:52 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings (Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126960 > > Tonks here: > > I am not so sure about that. When I thought that Arthur was the one > that was going to die I screamed right out loud.. "She can't do that > to the children of the world!!!" Killing off a parent, especially > one with such a large family, no.. no.. I say... no!! Of course she > did say that she didn't care if she had any friends left at the end. > I was sure that if she had killed Arthur that there would have been > a backlash of fans. How could Molly have ever managed with no work > stills, etc. > > I can see that JKR might kill Bill or Charley and get away with it, > or maybe even Percy now that she has painted him in a bad light, but > I don't think she can get away with killing the parents or anyone > else. Or I am getting depressed already!! I know, I know, a couple > of deaths does not a war make. ;-( Better take my blood preasure > meds when I start reading the next book. > > Tonks_op Well, as a parent of young children, I can't help but notice that all of children's literature/fantasy is filled with already dead, absent, or actively slaughtered parents (Bambi, anyone?). I find it somewhat disconcerting, myself. I had a similar reaction to yours when Arthur was bitten (oh no, not him!), but an even larger one when I realized that Sirius was doomed. It is dangerous to become Harry's substitute parent, and both the Weasleys now fit the bill. Perhaps it would be redundant (Harry's got the message: he's on his own), but you never know with authors. I, too, would not be surprised to see a Weasley or two culled in book six. I can only hope it's Percy. Like most people, I'm fond of the twins, despite the fact that they tend to do more harm than good, and I do have some sympathy for the sometimes annoying Molly. I can't decide if she would be relieved to die before her children or need to be there to protect them in classic 'she-tiger-defending- her-young' style. Bill & Charlie do seem to be the most disposable Weasleys; where a death would wreak great havoc on the Weasley family but not so much on the reader. On the other hand, disposing of Sirius shows that Jo doesn't take that much into consideration, so I am again worried for the Weasley parents. Whoops, got to rambling. I guess we'll find out in July. Cheers, Andromeda From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 09:59:48 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 09:59:48 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126961 Allen > > That is not a dragon, it is a Dark Mark. The appearance of a Dark > Mark would also explain why the characters are looking up and have a > concerned expression on their faces. > > Maybe the dark mark in the sky above them means that the war is finally in full swing? Didn't JKR mention the next two books would involve that? Maybe that's symbolic, (in a pensieve or not. Personally I don't think that the figures at the base of the pillar are IN the pensieve. It would have been easy enough for MGP to put them IN the pensieve, if that indeed is what it is.) Maybe it's the famous 'Pillar of Storge.' *snicker* Just kidding. Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 10:12:59 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 10:12:59 -0000 Subject: The Seven Charms in HPSS In-Reply-To: <1ef.38f034dc.2f7d61f7@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126962 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nrsedany2be at a... wrote: > Miss Nitpicky here, but the devil's snare didn't cure those who were > petrified in book two, that was the mandrakes. So task 2 the devil's snare really > didn't have anything to do for the plot of book 2. > Danielle But wasn't it a plant that had to be grown to cure them? Mandrakes, you said. Maybe it's just a plant reference. The plant had a lot to do with the plot, the revival of those who would otherwise have been killed. Maybe it was just convenient. Devil's snare comes back in book 5 in St. Mungos, right? (No point to make here, just wondering if I remembered that correctly!) Can anyone confirm, please? Chys From hambtty at triad.rr.com Fri Apr 1 15:02:47 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:02:47 -0000 Subject: Dobby's powers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126963 It appears that Dobby has powers greater than wizards. I wonder do all HEs have the same? Dobby can apparate inside Hogwarts and wizards/witches cannot. He had more power than Malfoy, Sr. after he was freed. So are they a danger to the WW if they are freed? Is that why they must be kept in servitude? From Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 1 15:01:57 2005 From: Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com (unicorn_72) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 15:01:57 -0000 Subject: Self-taught Occlumency? I think not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126964 > > Karen wrote: > > I was wondering if occlumency might be considered to be a 'dark > > art'. > (snipped) > Kemper wrote: > This has been an interesting thread. No I don't think it's a dark > art. But I think Snape did develop his mastery of Occlumency as a > defense against 'mental' abuse at home. (snipped) KarentheUnicorn's reply: I think that, Legilimency is considered the dark art. If Voldemort can, look into your eyes and take thoughts out of your head and actually sorta see your memories, that seems very wrong. I don't consider that it would be a bad skill to have though! But somehow not approprate to do to someone. But since Occlumency is the defense against it, it would not be. But I wonder why its not taught directly at Hogwarts...unless thats something they teach in 7th year. But then, why would it be such a secret for Snape to teach Harry, I suppose it was because of Umbebutt. I do agree with you Kemper about Snape and how he may have leared Occlumency. Perhaps his learning was as a defense against abuse, though we don't have much canon to go on this subject of Snape having an abused existance as a youth, we do have the idea of it from canon. I'm more apt to agree with that on the few things I've seen and from his attitude that he was probably abused. So if say Snape was abused, then he may have developed these skills on his own, after all we have canon to tell us directly from Sirius's mouth that Snape knew more curses than a 7th year when he was a first year. Plus considering he was very young when he started teaching, I don't see that he went to some teaching college in the wizarding world (haha) So, is it perhaps one reason he is not so good at teaching Occlumency, that he himself was not actually taught the method by someone, but, that it was a product of survival. If you take Ron for example, he lived with a magical family, but for the most part is as ignorant to using magic as Harry was when they were first years. So, how then did Snape know so much his first year? The direct line of thinking is, walking backwards from the Occlumency lessons scene's of Snapes memory, he must have been abused, so he had to defend himself..etc etc. This may explain in the pensive memory why Snape is so quick to grab his wand. It could be that his existance has been totally lived out in abuse, I could almost say, maybe that is why he liked getting into Harry's head during the Occlumency lesson, and seeing him abused, its possible he now hungers for that, knowing someone else has suffered like him or in a like manner. So, this could be one reason he wants respect and wants to manipulate others, because he himself is being manipulated by others (Voldemort, Perhaps his parents, perhaps Dumbledore also), and since the students are weaker, he seems them as him when he had no power, so he is playing out the roll of father figure he familar with....meh... The only contradiction in that is he favors his Slytherins and doesn't abuse them. But, my theory on that is, they are an ends to him winning the Qudditch cup and House Cup. So, to favor them gives him status/respect...example, You wouldn't beat your best hunting dog to death...so in effect he is using them to get what he wants, by favoring them. So maybe he doesn't like them as much as is implied. Is it really any different that McGonagall favoring Harry? meh..I don't know... KarentheUnicorn From WNCMegs at aol.com Fri Apr 1 17:53:05 2005 From: WNCMegs at aol.com (Megan) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:53:05 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126965 > bboyminn: > > Well, as far as Slytherins and especially Draco, what they want to be > when they grow up is . . . . . RICH! Draco is easy, he comes for what > appears to be an 'Old Money' family, all he has to do is continue with > his father's partronage network and his many business ventures. Even > if Lucius is scum, there are still a lot of people who depend on his > money to keep the wheel of business rolling. > > Personally, in my own warped extension of the wizard world, I see > Seamus and Dean starting an advertising agency that makes use of > Dean's artistic abilities. Hermione I see as a free-lance magical > consultant. She is hired by various sorts of magical businesses to > solve business related magical problems. In my twisted wizard world, > she has invented new building techniques for magical construction > companies, and new diagnostic spells for St. Mungos; and more. After a > few years as Aurors, Ron and Harry retire and assist Fred and George > with their business ventures which have grown into one of the wizard > worlds largest magical employeers, and even branched out into muggle > products. Neville, of couse, is happily married to a beautiful wife > (Melissa) and have three happy healthy children (boy and two girls), > and spend his time in North Central England running his rare and > exotic magical plant and herb farm. Percy, despite a few setbacks, in > time works his way up to Junior Minister, and could actually become > the Minister of Magic someday. Ginny is wealthy by association with > her brothers, so she doesn't need a steady job, she rambles from job > to job until she eventually meets Prince Harry in a nightclub and > after a long courtship, marries him. Then again, maybe not. > > Aren't you glad you asked? Megan: Of course I am glad I asked!!! :-D I wonder what EXACTLY DOES Lucius Malfoy DO for a living. I know where has to be SOMETHING. Oh well! I wonder if his credibitily as a business man has been ruined because of his arrest. There have always been rumors about his "dark side" but never any proof. Will people abandon the Malfoy's and search for other suppliers of whatever he provides? This might open the market up for new ventures in the business. I like you ideal with Hermione. She never did settle on one job idea, never taking any of the brochures seriously. She wanted something "worthwile" and helping a variaty of people might be what she wants. OR she could design a whole area of products for the Elf, Dobby her main designer, run and employed (and paid) for Free Elvs all over Britian. There could be clothing, furniture, anything for the "Elf on the Go." Percy is VERY ambitious. Someone, I do not remember who, made the comment, book 4 or 5, about Percy having PLANS PLANS PLANS. I am sure he is working on them as we speak, locking himself in his bedroom in London, scribling away on parchment. He probabky WILL become MoM and IF SO, when? In an upcoming book? Will he SUPPORT Dumbledore and Harry? Gred and Feorge are GENUSIS! I would not be surprised if they stretch their arms to the Muggle World. Everyone LOVES a good joke! Neville.... dear, sweet Neville. We are about to witness the blossoming of this dear boy. He has a lot of potential in a lot of areas. Herbology is a strong suit, and his DADA is getting better also. I bed, just like Harry, if left alone in Potions, he COULD do the work. He is shy and not confident in his abilities. He is going to be great in whatever he chooses. Ron- QUIDDITCH in some way. Maybe an Auror but he loves quidditch and I have a strong feeling he is going to become one of the best on the team in the next 2 books. Ginny- She can work with Fred and George. She shares their humor, understands what they are doing, and enjoys it. Maybe she'll marry Harry and have beautiful red haired, green eyes babies. Harry... I want to see him live through the books. He will make it TO book 7 but will he make it OUT of book 7? That is a lot of contriversy in itself. Harry ould be a GREAT Auror. He has the talent, but is his fame too much? If he was an Metamorphigi (I know I butched the spelling) like Tonks which he may be, he coukd change his appearance. I will have to talk about my ideas on THAT later. He would be a GREAT teacher. He has the experince--the DA group and he loved it! He loved teaching the kids, seeing them grow better. I wouldn't be surpised if he was an Auror for a bit then a teacher or go strait into the teaching profession. From lorelei_2 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 1 18:50:19 2005 From: lorelei_2 at hotmail.com (Laurie Suiter) Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 10:50:19 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Full HBP cover artwork References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126966 Is it possible the thoughts in the pensieve might be Harry's...? Perhaps DD helped him to extract his memories of that eventful night so they can be examined from an older perspective (i.e., not Baby Harry's) via the pensieve...? Also, just to throw a random thought out there...what if the two kids on the left are James and Lily? The girl on the right could be a new ghost, along the lines of Moaning Myrtle...? Respectfully submitting these thoughts... Laurie S. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jeterluver2 at aol.com Fri Apr 1 20:25:35 2005 From: jeterluver2 at aol.com (Marissa) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 20:25:35 -0000 Subject: Beware the lighting (was Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126967 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "orqad7" wrote: > > Grand Pre chooses the colouring for her artwork carefully. There > has been a great deal of speculation about Harry having his mother's > GREEN eyes. Trying to follow some kind of logic do you think the > eyes are the reason for the colour? > > Or perhaps something to do with the green light on the night James > and Lily died. Maybe DD was there, so Harry and DD are looking into > the pensieve at that very night. > > "orqad7" I don't think so. If DD was there he would've brought Harry to the Dursley's instead of sending Hagrid. Also, I can't see Dumbledore standing there and just watching from the sidelines. It could be just a color scheme, I mean what does the purple represent? Marissa who still thinks the girl on the right is Ginny because she's been rooting for Harry/Ginny since the third book... From hambtty at triad.rr.com Fri Apr 1 20:38:55 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 20:38:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's Death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126968 I read with interest the post from Tonks 1/05. It makes sense to me especially since JKR talked about what people were not asking. Why didn't LV die? Harry is so similar to Tom Riddle but is making better choices when confronted with evil vs good. So, if Harry is killed by LV and Harry has learned to discipline himself enough to hold onto his "goodness" then would LV become Harry as we know him. Or will DD teach Harry to become like the phoenix bird? Harry will kill LV and in the process die himself and be reborn from his own ashes. But where does the color of his eyes fall into place? JKR has said that it is important that Harry has his mother's eyes. What ya think? From orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 1 22:27:17 2005 From: orqad7 at yahoo.co.uk (orqad7) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 22:27:17 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126969 I had a look a previos artwork and think I may have found some similarities between characters on the new cover and those seen previously. To have a look for yourselves visit www.hogwarts- gallery.org and select the books link. Previous arguments suggest that it can't be Ron and Hermione on the left because Ron doesn't look like that. However upon inspection of the artwork for 'November,page 4' this is definitely the way GrandPre draws them. Now for the person on the right. This one was tricky. Have a look on page 2, the picture from chapter 25 from OotP. Similarities? I think so. What was Harry doing in chapter 25 you ask. Well, he was on a date with Cho Chang!! Conclusion I think that the characters appearing on the new cover are; Harry Dumbledore Ron and Hermione and Cho Chang!!!! From someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au Sat Apr 2 04:10:33 2005 From: someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au (Someone) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 04:10:33 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126970 wrote: > > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience > to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you > best." This cynical attitude of it's only wrong if you get caught may > well describe the "real world", but the argument is do we want to > teach our youngsters such values? The critiquer points to the amount > of rule-breaking and lying by Harry and his pals, the gradual > corrupting of Hermoine to share such situational values, and even > Dumbledore's rewarding or overlooking Harry's blatant disobedience to > rules, while acknowledging (in Book 4) his own ambiguous moral compass > ("It is my belief . . . that truth is generally preferable to lies.") > John: That's quite an astounding interpretation of (that aspect of) the books! I'm wondering, has this "critiquer" even read them, or did he/she fear being "corrupted" by those scurvy, lying curs HR&H? Harry and Co. certainly break rules routinely, but note that it is almost always in aid of a noble cause, the "greater good", as it were. It brings to mind that old question about whether bad, morally obtuse, rules/laws, are, in fact, rules/laws at all. If not, one would appear to be justified in breaking them. As for DD, I think he's pretty cool about people breaking the minor, silly little rules (e.g. sneaking food out of the kitchens at night), because doing so doesn't really leave any lasting harm on anyone. Note how disappointed he was, though, after that episode with Ron, Harry and the flying car. So the books are certainly "moral", unambiguously so IMO. They don't, however, go over the top, and that's what I like about them. Harry and Co. aren't squeaky-clean; they're regular kids who make mistakes; but they generally *try* to do the right thing, and that, for me, is the most important thing. Just my opinion, John. From someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au Sat Apr 2 09:49:33 2005 From: someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au (Someone) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 09:49:33 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?An_Exercise_in_Sugarcoating_Voldy=92s_Blunderings?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126971 Held, by the general population of HPFGU, that Voldy be guilty beyond reasonable doubt on four counts of "being a bungler", as well as a fifth of "generally failing to live up to expectations as bad- ass-evil-overlord-of the WW." We're most of us pretty scornful of Voldy's efforts so far. Four times, now, he's allowed a teenage boy to escape his slippery coils and, basically, lost all credibility where it comes to this evil overlord caper. So can one put forth a defense of him, capable of standing up to the rigorous scrutiny of the HPFGU council of elders (and anyone else whose interested)? Let's try and put a positive spin on Voldy's long and rather amusing line of bungled attempts to kill Harry Potter: 1. October 31, 1981 (Halloween). Godric's Hollow. Voldy's had a pretty smooth run the past eleven-odd years; everything he's touched has turned to gold, or so it would seem. OK, so he's allowed the Potters and the Nevilles-es to escape him three times, but so what? It hasn't exactly put a halt to his conquest of the WW, has it now? Now we all know what happens next; ChosenOne!Harry is born, and promptly stuffs Voldy at GH, leaving him with a severe case of the vapors. So the guy was "due"; as they say, "you have to lose one before you win one". This was Voldy's defeat. Perhaps he was a little over-confident (wouldn't you be after such a run of successes?), but then again Lily's "ancient magic" was pretty hot stuff. Can we put a positive spin on things? Well, he still managed to take out a couple of guns in Lily and James, didn't he? He got them as good as they got him, and, what's more, fixed up their house good and proper. More importantly, the experience provided him with some useful parameters as to judge the scope of his immortality?he survived an AK, just barely of course, but nonetheless, encouraging! Give him his body back and he'll be able to make a few refinements, tweak it here and there; strengthen the fortifications, as it were. Conclusion: Voldy comes out second best but, as shown above, can take a few positives from the experience. His take-over of the WW's been set back about 13 years, but what's that to someone who's nigh on immortal? He's just taken long service leave in Albania, is all. Get him back to work refreshed and he'll be all fired up to get stuck in again. 2. 1991-92, Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry. Thus Voldy spends eight (nine? ten?) happy years gadding about the backwoods of Albania, getting in touch with his spiritual and snaky sides, but also waiting, always waiting. Quirrell comes along and Voldy, opportunistic sort of bugger that he is, takes his first ticket out of there. And give him credit; the bloke's been disembodied, he's been wallowing in a ditch for the last ten years, but still he has the wherewithal to hatch a scheme to snatch the PS/SS from right under the old guy's crooked nose. But alas, "the old guy" pulls a DD special with that accursed mirror, and Quirrell, the idjit, decides to lay a rugby tackle on Potter when he's got a magic wand in his hand ("Accio Stone", Stupid!). DD intervenes, Harry survives, Quirrell takes one for the team, and Voldy slinks back from whence he came. Conclusion: Inhibited by certain corporeal-related circumstances, and working with limited resources, Vapour!Mort's managed to acquit himself well. Potter ends up getting off on a technicality and Voldy's been given *plenty* of food for thought regarding the boy's protection. We can assume, I think, that he now has a pretty good idea of what makes Harry tick ("It's the ancient magic, I tell you, the ancient magic!"). He's had a crack at the old "give yourself up to the dark side" ruse; that failed, so at least he knows what he's working with now. There'll be no dithering around next time, don't worry `bout that. Most importantly, perhaps, he's seen enough to suggest that there are chinks in Albus' armor. The old bloke runs a tight ship, but his fortress is by no means impenetrable. Keep that in mind for when you finally get around to conquering the school 3. June 24, 1995, Graveyard in Little Hangleton. This was supposed to be the one; the grand return of The Master, the day that Potter upstart was finally to be shown who's boss. Where, oh where did it all go pear-shaped, Voldy? Well, I'd say *somewhere* between untying Harry from TR senior's headstone, and then giving the boy his wand back. Personally, I would have spent a few minutes idly admiring my new body, and then killed the little rapscallion on the spot (charming fellow, I know). But no, the silly cad had to bugger around with "making an example" of the boy, ranting exultantly at his followers and generally carrying on like a good sort. Before he knew it, the lad had wriggled his way out of it again. What excuses can one cook up for Voldy now? Was he perhaps out of touch after not having picked up a wand for 13 years? It certainly seems so. Thus, why not kill Potter while he's un-armed and defenceless? The kid's pretty special, obviously; so why give him any sort of chance at all? Some have said that he wanted to show the lads that there was nothing particularly special about the boy, nothing there to fear. Well, there certainly *wouldn't* have been reason to fear him were he *dead*, would there now? Is Voldy just a lair? Or could he possibly have a deep-rooted sense of honor hidden away within that scaly heart of his? Conclusion: Whatever way you look at it, Voldy screwed up big time on this occasion. His followers wouldn't have been *particularly* impressed with their leader, I wouldn't have thought?did they "close ranks" around the chief or would they be beginning to have second thoughts about his capacity to lead them to glory? At least Voldy's got his body back now (it makes everyday tasks considerably easier) and that's some consolation, I guess. He can now touch the boy as well, although that "gleam of triumph" of DD's wasn't overly encouraging 4. June, 1996, Ministry of Magic, London. Not the type to know when he's beat, Voldy hatches another zany plot to lure "the boy who lived" into his waiting arms. Heartbreakingly, months of planning again go down the drain, and what is more, his cover is blown. At least it isn't fully his fault this time. He sets things up flawlessly, and entrusts it to his "elite" squadron of DEs to deliver the coup de grace. *That* was his mistake. By the time he arrives at the MOM to salvage what he can from the wreckage, the prophecy has been lost and his pupils have shown themselves sadly deficient in the art of overpowering a small band of school children. It seems as if he will still be able to dispose of the Potter boy, thereby recovering a little respectability, but once again he just can't resist directing one of his sneering one-liners at the boy, giving *bloody* DD time to interpose. The big boys nuke it out in the front atrium and note that Voldy actually holds his own: he's on his own out there, while DD takes him on with an assortment of animated statues and a super intelligent phoenix. That bully-boy, him. What ever happened to fair play and one on one combat? Conclusion: The goodies eventually romp it home down below in the death chamber, Voldemort charitably announces his return to the world and Harry escapes yet again. It doesn't look too good for him. However, it might just be a blessing in disguise. He's had a whole year to quietly build up his army, so now that he's out in the open he has no choice but to get down to business. No more dithering around with crackpot schemes to kill Harry Potter. And what's he lost? He would probably have been found out the moment he took affirmative action anyway. Summation: Well, it isn't particularly encouraging, but if you look at things from a slightly warped perspective you can *sort of* see some method to his madness. And give him credit where it's due; he's a fairly determined sort, and as the scene at the end of OOTP shows, he's still very much sane, where a lot of people would perhaps be otherwise. I'd say he goes into Voldy War Two looking pretty good; he just hasn't been able to finish off that slippery blighter Potter, that's all. So, still guilty on all five charges? John, with a Voldy-like rant. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 16:00:36 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:00:36 -0000 Subject: FILK: What do you do with a Muggle Werewolf? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126972 This is one of those times I think I have been filking too long. I was pondering werewolves (long story), when I remembered in FB that it said that werewolves could be wizard or Muggle. I started wondering about how a Muggle would be treated, and how it would be kept secret from the rest of the Muggle world. Unbidden, this filk entered my head, probably due to the off-list singing of a certain severly mutated, but nonetheless charming Penguin of Doooom. (Did I get enough o's in there, Sean?) I dedicate this to my Antarctic friend. To the tune of "What can you do with a Drunken Sailor?" What do you do with a Muggle Werewolf? One who can grow quite a lot of hair-wolf? Can't have the Muggles stop and stare-wolf? Once he's in St. Mungo's? Go bind him up with some Magic shackles. Give him a room with a hag who cackles. One who's for sure gonna raise his hackles. Tied up in St. Mungo's. Give him a goblet of good old wolfsbane. Might get a hairball, but he'll still stay sane. 'Til the full moon is gone he'll remain Safely in St. Mungo's. What can we do with his Muggle cohorts? Family and friends and his pubmates of sorts? This surely calls for some drastic resorts! Keep them from St. Mungo's. Call up an Auror- obliviate them. Cannot recall what nearly ate them. Must find a way we can compensate them- Bill it to St. Mungo's. Make his wife think he was out fox-hunting. Make his boss think he was at work grunting. Give the excuses that he'll be wanting Whilst he's in St. Mungo's. What do you do with a Muggle Werewolf? He must be treated with extra care-wolf. No damage done that we can't repair-wolf If he's in St. Mungo's. Ginger, back to her appointed tasks of the day. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Apr 2 16:05:32 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:05:32 -0000 Subject: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126973 NoraL > The best analogy for books on aikido (I recommend Westbrook & Ratti > and Saotome for descriptions of technique) are medieval chant > manuscripts in neumatic notation. They make absolutely perfect sense > if you already know what you're doing. You can't learn how to sing > chant from them unless you already know a large number of chants, > though. Since I know how irimi-nage generally works (as well as > anyone does with The Twenty Year Technique), aikido books are useful; > but you can't learn how to do proper irimi-nage from the book. Pippin: But you are choosing a very narrow example -- Hebrew trope for Torah reading is completely obscure if you've never heard Torah chanted, but there are books that tell how to translate Hebrew trope symbols into conventional musical notation. At the very least,Harry could have learned that he was not being taught according to the accepted method, which would have been incredibly useful for him to know, or conversely, that he *was* being taught according to the accepted method and Snape wasn't deliberately making things difficult. Of course Snape was making things difficult, but the root cause of that is the one Dumbledore pointed towards, IMO -- Snape's grudge against James makes it gratifying for Snape when Harry fails, because it gives Snape an excuse for righteous anger. That makes Harry's passive aggressive behavior particularly counterproductive. I hope the conclusion of OOP means it is really coming to an end, and is not merely a foreshadowing. Nora: > What came to me last night after posting is why your version of the > karate analogy is unlikely to work, as well. Someone may well learn > a number of kata working by himself from a video. I don't want to > see what happens in his first sparring match against an experienced > partner, though. Occlumency is a two-person affair, unlike figure > skating or casting a Patronus. Pippin: Hmmm....I wonder, would a boggart-Snape be capable of legilimency? Pippin From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 16:25:59 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:25:59 -0000 Subject: The Seven Charms in HPSS In-Reply-To: <1ef.38f034dc.2f7d61f7@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126974 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Nrsedany2be at a... wrote: So task 2 the devil's snare really didn't have anything to do for the plot of book 2. Tonks: If we look at book 2 as the Chamber of Secrets = Tomb, then the Devil's Snare does fit. The devil snared Eve and this lead to death of the human race. Eve symbolized by Ginny ends up in the Tomb with Harry. (Eve and Adam.) And then Christ in the form of Faulks, sent by God (DD) comes to bring them back to life. They would have both died there at the hands of the snake otherwise. Tonks_op From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sat Apr 2 16:28:03 2005 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 2 Apr 2005 16:28:03 -0000 Subject: New poll for HPforGrownups Message-ID: <1112459283.212.47248.w126@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 126975 Enter your vote today! A new poll has been created for the HPforGrownups group: The following poll has been established in order to help Admin gain a sense of list members' preferences for a shutdown period at the time of HBP's release. While your opinions will be very helpful to us, there are a number of administrative issues to consider and so the Admin Team will make the final determination on list closure. Therefore, this poll will be advisory and not binding. Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince will be released at 12:01 a.m., UK Time, July 16, 2005. The HPfGU list will close for some period of time in order to allow everyone an opportunity to read the book, to organize their thoughts, and to prepare for posting on new canon. During this time, members will still have access to Fantastic Posts and to the archives, files, polls and databases of the main list, but no new posting will be allowed. Since our members reside in many nations around the world, a table has been created in the files section to assist you in determining just what the various shutdown possibilities would mean for you. To view the table, follow this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/ and select "HBPTimes.html". For OoP's release in 2003, HPfGU was closed to posting for 45 hours. What do you believe would be an ideal length of time for a posting shutdown after the release of HBP? o 36 hours o 45 hours o 60 hours o 72 hours o 83 hours o 4 days o 5 days o 1 week o 10 days o 2 weeks To vote, please visit the following web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1748067 Note: Please do not reply to this message. Poll votes are not collected via email. To vote, you must go to the Yahoo! Groups web site listed above. Thanks! From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 2 16:33:55 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:33:55 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126976 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" wrote: > > I recently read a crtique of the "Potter" books that caused me to > briefly question whether, as a parent, I should be endorsing the > series as whole-heartedly as I have. I remain a big fan, but I'd like > to at least expose others to a few of the critiques and hear their > views on such criticisms that I saw. I'll start this message w just > one such point! > > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience > to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you > best." This cynical attitude of it's only wrong if you get caught may > well describe the "real world", but the argument is do we want to > teach our youngsters such values? The critiquer points to the amount > of rule-breaking and lying by Harry and his pals, the gradual > corrupting of Hermoine to share such situational values, and even > Dumbledore's rewarding or overlooking Harry's blatant disobedience to > rules, while acknowledging (in Book 4) his own ambiguous moral compass > ("It is my belief . . . that truth is generally preferable to lies.") > > Your views????? Hannah: Well, yes, they do bend the rules, but I would disagree with some of the specific points raised. Harry and co. do get punished for breaking the rules, and sometimes even for *not* breaking the rules! The books also show how injustice and corruption devalue the rules. And the worst incident we see where rule breaking is ignored/ not punished severely (that of Snape, the Marauders, and particularly the Prank) shows how being excused rather than punished can have serious consequences in itself. On the whole, the HP kids are pretty much like normal children. Most of the time, they break the rules only where they perceive them to be unfair, or where it is necessary for reasons of emergency. I think they are very moral books, and if JKR presented a world where everyone followed the rules to the letter, then it would be dull, unrealistic, and wouldn't appeal to children in the first place. Hannah From nrenka at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 16:34:21 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:34:21 -0000 Subject: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126977 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > But you are choosing a very narrow example -- Hebrew trope for > Torah reading is completely obscure if you've never heard Torah > chanted, but there are books that tell how to translate Hebrew > trope symbols into conventional musical notation. On the other hand, musical notation is not the complete transmission of everything that you need to know how to do in order to sing Hebrew cantilation in proper style--correct? I could go through and transcribe it into notation and sing it from that, but while I might get some of it right, it would probably be a far cry from the proper thing. Even with a musical score for something like a Bach prelude, any performer is bringing a wealth of experience and knowledge that was *not* acquired solely through text. > At the very least, Harry could have learned that he was not being > taught according to the accepted method, which would have been > incredibly useful for him to know, or conversely, that he *was* > being taught according to the accepted method and Snape wasn't > deliberately making things difficult. This does all depend upon there being written description of the techniques of teaching this, which are generally different from descriptions of how something works. For instance, it's one thing to know music theory as laid out in the Pink Book, but the Pink Book itself will not explain to you how to get these things into the heads of first-year theory students. Again, I'm rather struck by Hermione's lack of engagement in this subject. There is no solid proof pro or contra, but given Tonks' comments I do wonder about the possibility of an esoteric, orally transmitted Occlumency tradition. > Of course Snape was making things difficult, but the root cause of > that is the one Dumbledore pointed towards, IMO -- Snape's grudge > against James makes it gratifying for Snape when Harry fails, > because it gives Snape an excuse for righteous anger. That makes > Harry's passive aggressive behavior particularly counterproductive. > I hope the conclusion of OOP means it is really coming to an > end, and is not merely a foreshadowing. Well, you could always start playing with ESE!Snape for variety, Pippin. :) What I find troubling, perhaps, is the casual "Oh, of course Snape was making things difficult, but...". Is it wrong then to be worried when Snape lets his long-standing grudge (and his enjoyment of 'righteous' anger) get in the way of doing something important that he was charged with by the Headmaster? For me, this is a significant factor in why I'm actually a lot more wary of Snape post- OotP than pre-, and what further weakened the DISHWASHER reading of the PoA SS scene. >From collating past comments, I really don't understand your Snape at all. He's more damaged than Black and thus really can't help a lot of his behavior, but he tries very hard so that his results are generally good and he should be trusted; his grudges admittedly get the better of him, but he's so important and necessary that Harry should adapt himself to deal with Snape and learn the very important things that Snape is really not terribly conscientious about teaching him... Well, a few months and this all might be cleared up. Or at least some of it. (I admit it will be gratifying to see at least some of a large mass of mutually exclusive theories go, but that's just me. I'm not sure the end of OotP foreshadows the end of it in the way that you would like, either...but I guess that the revealing of backstory is in order.) > Pippin: > Hmmm....I wonder, would a boggart-Snape be capable of legilimency? Only if a boggart-Dementor is capable of Kissing someone, and we don't know about that. Legilimency I doubt because that seems to require an act of intent on the part of the caster, but...curious. I wonder if she's thought it out. -Nora notes that the only way older neumes are readable is through the grace of a few manuscripts and the fact that 'Puer natus est nobis' didn't really change over 400+ years From hpfgu.elves at gmail.com Sat Apr 2 16:48:30 2005 From: hpfgu.elves at gmail.com (herring_elf) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:48:30 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Poll on list closure at HBP release Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126978 Greetings from Hexquarters! When Order of the Phoenix was released in June 2003, the HPfGU list was closed to posting for 45 hours, beginning with the UK official release time of 12:01 a.m. There were many reasons for this closure, foremost among them the desire to provide list members with a period of time in which to read the new book without encountering spoilers, as well as an opportunity to formulate their thoughts, ideas, reactions, new theories, etc. Additionally, the list closure allowed the Admin Team a chance to themselves read the books and to prepare for the expected significant jump in posting and membership which tends to accompany new canon. We will again close HPfGU to posting for a period of time when Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince is released. As with OoP's release, this will not affect HPfGU sister groups, such as OT- Chatter, nor the HPfGU main list archives and Fantastic Posts, which will remain searchable during the posting shutdown. To assist you in determining how the various closure options would affect you where you live in the world, a table has been created for numerous time zones and list closure options. If you would like to consult this table, please follow this link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/ and click on the file named "HBPTimes.htm." Alternately, you might visit either of the following sites: http://www.timeanddate.com http://www.timezoneconverter.com/cgi-bin/tzc.tzc At this time, we would welcome HPfGU members' submitting their preferences in the HBP List Closure poll, which can be found at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1748067 . While your opinions will be very helpful to us, there are a number of administrative issues to consider, and so the Admin Team will make the final determination on list closure. Therefore, this poll will be advisory and not binding. If you have any comments to make about this issue, please do not do so here on the main list; instead, join the discussion already underway at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback . You should read the instructions there on how to join if you are not already a member of Feedback. Please do not attempt to reply to this message to cast your vote, as poll votes are not collected via e-mail. You must go to the Yahoo! Groups site listed above to cast your vote. Thanks! Shorty Elf, for the HPfGU Admin Team From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 2 16:52:11 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:52:11 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_An_Exercise_in_Sugarcoating_Voldy=92s_Blunderings?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126979 > John wrote: > > We're most of us pretty scornful of Voldy's efforts so far. Four > times, now, he's allowed a teenage boy to escape his slippery coils > and, basically, lost all credibility where it comes to this evil > overlord caper. > > So can one put forth a defense of him, capable of standing up to the > rigorous scrutiny of the HPFGU council of elders (and anyone else > whose interested)? > Hannah: Well done on a great post! It's nice to see there are ways of making LV's 'CartoonOverlord' blunders seem a bit more believable. I think his main problem is constant underestimation of Harry. The first time, at Godric's Hollow, he can be forgiven. He went in, blasted his way through, and (assuming it was an AK he used on Harry) got caught out when an unblockable, irreversible spell rebounded on him. I think his worst error is really the graveyard. In the other two incidences he was let down by the incompetence of his followers and managed to escape even though he was outnumbered. So I suppose one major directly attributable cockup in about twenty six years of tyranny is perhaps excusable. Hannah From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 16:53:08 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 08:53:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050402165308.63005.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 126980 > Pippin: > Of course Snape was making things difficult, but the root cause > of that is the one Dumbledore pointed towards, IMO -- Snape's > grudge against James makes it gratifying for Snape when Harry > fails, because it gives Snape an excuse for righteous anger. That > makes Harry's passive aggressive behavior particularly > counterproductive. I think Snape is a more complicated character than that. In fact one of the ways that Harry shows how young he still is is his habit of ascribing to adult characters the same reactions and feelings that he has as a teen. It wasn't gratifying for Snape when Harry failed; he was white faced and furious when he realized the dreams were continuing and intensifying. Snape, unlike Harry, knows what's going to happen if Voldemort comes to power; his own life is probably forfeit very shortly thereafter. So I really don't see any sign that Snape is gratified by Harry's lack of progress in occlumency. What I do see is that Snape's feelings about James are still pretty raw and close to the surface, and that he wasn't able to control his anger when Harry got a firsthand look at his memories. Snape is still in a lot of pain from things that happened over 20 years earlier. Dumbledore acknowledges this when he tells Harry that some wounds are too deep for healing. It's not a matter of Snape wilfully refusing to stop hurting and lashing out; Dumbledore uses medical terminology to indicate the situation so that he's not making value judgements about blame. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 17:37:18 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 17:37:18 -0000 Subject: Lucius - Nature of Money & Wealth (was Future Professions... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Megan" wrote: > > > > > > bboyminn: > > > > Well, as far as Slytherins and especially Draco, what they want to > > be when they grow up is . . . . . RICH! Draco is easy, he comes > > for what appears to be an 'Old Money' family, all he has to do is > > continue with his father's partronage network and his many > > business ventures. > > Megan: > > Of course I am glad I asked!!! :-D > > I wonder what EXACTLY DOES Lucius Malfoy DO for a living. I know > where has to be SOMETHING. Oh well! I wonder if his credibitily as a > business man has been ruined because of his arrest. ...edited... bboyminn: Funny you should ask (again), I just happen to have an essay on that very subject which I posted in a different group. Date: Mon Jan 26, 2004 6:47 pm Subject: Speculation on the Nature of Money and Wealthy - Lucius Malfoy I guess we would have to classify this as speculative canon; taking what we see in the book, and speculating on what we don't see, but that which is none the less reasonable and likely. On various occasions the question has been raised as to how Lucius Malfoy makes and maintains his wealth. I think if we take Alec's patronage network idea (Hogs_Head-msg#540 -Expecto Patronus - Part III) and expand on it, it becomes very clear how someone like Malfoy earns his money. If you have seen the movie Nicholas Nickelby, then evil Uncle Ralph Nickelby mirrors Lucius Malfoy very closely. Again, this is all speculation, but I think it is reasonable and likely speculation. Alec portrays Lucius as the head of a large patronage network, and I believe Lucius makes his money by facilitating business transactions within his network. For example, let's say an importer who is a friend of Lucius's need working capital to import and sell a large shipment of thin bottomed cauldrons. Lucius supplies that working capital in return for a share of the profits. A quick turn over of his money and a handsome profit. The perfect example of a patron supporting his clients; he takes care of them and they take care of him. But Lucius also facilitates transactions between his co-clients. Let's suppose that the owner of the Potion Ingredients shop (apothecary) is a friend of the Malfoy Network. Naturally, he is going to support the network by buying his ingredients from wholesalers that are also part of the Malfoy network. In exchange for assuring the continued efficient and effective operation of both businesses, Malfoy takes a small slice of the profit from the transactions. The Buyer, the owner of the apothecary shop, buys from Malfoy's supplier even if the price is slightly higher than on the general market, because there may very well come a time when he needs to call more deeply on Malfoy's service. For example, he may suddenly need to by a large quantity of a rare and expensive ingredient. The end customers of the apothecary shop don't care where the ingredients come from, that's the owner's problem, they just know they want them and it's his job to supply them. So, the apothecary shop owner borrows working capital from Malfoy to complete the transaction. Malfoy gets a profit slice of the transaction that takes place in his network and interest on the loan. One might ask why the owner would borrow from Malfoy rather than the bank? The difference is that Malfoy's network is mutually beneficial, and extends far beyond the loaning of money. The shop owners and import/export companies also get to draw on Malfoy's extensive network of foreign, domestic, and political contacts. Where as the Goblin's simply loan money. It's not their job to help you run your business; they don't care if you succeed or fail as long as they get their money. Malfoy however has a very vested interest in making sure that everyone gets what they want. Because every successful transaction is money in his pocket as well as interest from any loans. It's entirely possible that Malfoy also has inherited or purchased investment real estate and may own major or minor interest in several businesses. These are nothing more that money making investments to him, I seriously doubt he takes an active part unless he sees his net return diminish for some reason. When we read books and see movies that take place in an era similar to that depicted in the wizard world, (think Scrooge) we see that money lenders and evil landlords are classic roles for rich people. Ammendment(4/2/05)- We know Malfoy lives on a large estate in Wiltshire in western England, typical of landlords of this (apparent) era, Malfoy probably rents his land to peasants, who work it and return a substantial portion of their profits to Malfoy. In the fewest possible words, Malfoy lives by the old adage, 'it takes money to make money'. Thoughts on the nature of Malfoy's wealth- Malfoy is Old Money, he lives off of what he inherited from his family, as they lived of what they inherited. In our discussions of the nature of inheritance in the wizard world and in old Europe, there was the implication that those who inherit 'old money' have a responsibility to not deplete that old money, but to use it as a way of generating new money to live off of, and to perhaps even increase the overall net worth of the estate. This desperation to maintain the original level of assets could account for how ruthless old rich people are typically portrayed. If we assume Malfoy inherited 1,000,000 Galleons in assets not all of which was cash (5.0 million pounds or $7.5 million) then he has an obligation to maintain that level of wealth. He has an obligation to assure that there is at least G1,000,000 in assets for Draco to inherit. So, it is possible that Lucius might drain his net assets down to G500,000 which would represent devastating circumstances to him. Keep in mind, that is 'assets' not cash. A situation like this could indeed represent desperate times for someone like Lucius. It might cause him to have to mortgage his assets which very strongly implies the risk of losing them if his financial fortunes don't make an up turn. Nothing could be a greater disgrace than to deplete the family fortune. Even if Lucius died and left Draco net assets of G500,000 that would be a terrible disgrace in the eyes of old money old Europe. In addition, to maintain the flow of commerce in his patronage network, Lucius would have to constantly have a large amount of working capital on hand. If his cash on hand diminished then he would be unable to service his patronage, and they could very well desert his network and seek out a better patron. Some have speculated that Lucius may not be as wealthy as he appears to be, if Malfoy was having a reversal of fortunes, he would go to desperate measure to keep his patronage network from finding out, and desperate measure can create desperate circumstances. If Malfoy is having financial problems, then his imprisonment in the latest book is going to wreak havoc with his patronage network as they all depend on him for their contined existence, and conversely and obviously, Malfoy depends on his network for his daily income. Indeed a sudden stagnation of Malfoy's assets could have rapid and devastating effects. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn Note: My idea for this essay came for Alexander Dossetor's five part essay which was reposted in the Hogs_Head Group by Lucky_Kari, where Alec speaks a length on the concept of a Patronage Network and other aspects of the wizard world; very interesting. Worth the read if you are a member of that group. Date: Sun Jan 25, 2004 12:40 am Subject: "Expecto Patronus" - or how the Wizarding World really works: Part I (of five) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Hogs_Head/message/538 It's long, very indepth and detailed, and more importantly, very insightful. Also, in Hogs_Head post#585 Alec himself replied to my post where among other things he comments on the /cost/ of maintaining a Patronage Network as well as profit. Steve From mysticowl at gmail.com Sat Apr 2 17:39:54 2005 From: mysticowl at gmail.com (Alina) Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 12:39:54 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Seven Charms in HPSS In-Reply-To: References: <1ef.38f034dc.2f7d61f7@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126982 Isn't the Devil's Snare the plant that strangled a man in St. Mungo's in OOP? If so, it's still somewhat important to the books, just not a book 2 plot point. Alina. From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 19:00:30 2005 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 19:00:30 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126983 "Hannah" wrote: > The first criticism was that the books > "clearly teach that obedience to rules > or morality is required only when such > obedience serves you best." If I have any criticism of the Harry Potter books it's that there is too little moral ambiguity in them, not too much; one welcome exception was Harry's use of an Unforgivable curse in book 5, I hope to see far more of that sort of thing in the future, it makes things interesting, I don't want to read about Dudley Doright. And Harry has broken many rules in his day, but not on of then were rules of morality, they were rules of bureaucracy. I might add that most of the horrors in the world were caused by too much respect for the rules not too little; the fist defense of any war criminal is always "I was just following orders." By the way, I think it unlikely the Harry Potter books will be the fist time children are introduced to moral ambiguity. > the gradual corrupting of Hermoine to > share such situational values Why is that corrupting? It's a fact, things change according to the situation. > Dumbledore's rewarding or overlooking > Harry's blatant disobedience to rules, > while acknowledging (in Book 4) his own > ambiguous moral compass ("It is my belief >. that truth is generally preferable to lies.") You've lost me, I find it hard to believe you disagree with what Dumbledore said. Eggplant From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 21:13:04 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:13:04 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_An_Exercise_in_Sugarcoating_Voldy=92s_Blunderings?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126984 John wrote: We're most of us pretty scornful of Voldy's efforts so far. Four times, now, he's allowed a teenage boy to escape his slippery coils and, basically, lost all credibility where it comes to this evil overlord caper. So can one put forth a defense of him, capable of standing up to the rigorous scrutiny of the HPFGU council of elders (and anyone else whose interested)? Hannah: Well done on a great post! It's nice to see there are ways of making LV's 'CartoonOverlord' blunders seem a bit more believable. Alla: I agree. Great post, John. Unfortunately I stay not very convinced of Voldy's believability. It is probably not even Voldy's actions, because those ARE actions of evil ... person ( or not even person now, somebody). I think it is simply the way Voldy is written. The way he talks, the way he indeed wants to show off in Graveyard that he is stronger than Harry. When I read about Voldy, I have to forcefully remind myself every time that I am reading about Evil with the capital "E". I need to feel the character and I definitely don't FEEL Voldy's evil. I have to admit Tom's speech to Harry was a little chilling, but that is about it. It had been said that Voldy's great asset was to make people to turn against each other like Sirius and Remus did for example. I want to know MORE about it, I want to know HOW Voldy achieved of all that. I want to see him as great manipulator of good guys,when he gets his hold on them. I want to be scared of Voldy. So far, I am definitely not. I know what he did, murders he committed, but that is as if his actions and the character itself, the emotional impact from the character exist separately in my mind. Hanna: I think his main problem is constant underestimation of Harry. The first time, at Godric's Hollow, he can be forgiven. He went in, blasted his way through, and (assuming it was an AK he used on Harry) got caught out when an unblockable, irreversible spell rebounded on him. I think his worst error is really the graveyard. Alla: I am really of two minds as to Graveyard scene. On one hand - Harry suffers for real here and he suffers with Voldie being present on the scene, so I can empathise. I can also buy Voldie not knowing about Priori and the appearance of the ghosts. All together - not too bad. What I find incredibly stupid is Voldie desire to duel with Harry, just as John said. One Avada - and that is it - no Harry, no problem for Voldy. Especially in light of Prophecy and Voldy knowing only first part of it. I also wish JKR would change his speech patterns. :) Just my opinion of course, Alla From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 21:35:02 2005 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:35:02 -0000 Subject: The Seven Charms in HPSS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Alina wrote: > Isn't the Devil's Snare the plant that strangled a man in St. Mungo's > in OOP? If so, it's still somewhat important to the books, just not a > book 2 plot point. > > Alina. To relate Devil's Snare to the second book, just think of going down a hole to a hidden chamber and meeting a snaky thing that kills. Hermione defeated the plant with fire, and Harry defeated the Basilisk with the help of Fawkes the Phoenix who had burst into flames just months before. Annemehr From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Fri Apr 1 11:01:45 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 11:01:45 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126986 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: >major snip >Ginny is wealthy by association with > her brothers, so she doesn't need a steady job, she rambles from job > to job until she eventually meets Prince Harry in a nightclub and > after a long courtship, marries him. Then again, maybe not. > > Aren't you glad you asked? > > Steve/bboyminn And Deborah replies: Come on, Steve, she's already had one Harry in her life. And anyway, have you got no ambition for the girl? The one she meets in the nightclub is Prince William! From captivity at gmail.com Fri Apr 1 18:02:53 2005 From: captivity at gmail.com (Avye) Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2005 18:02:53 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126987 Don't forget - Weasley's Wizarding Wheezes is turning quite a profit. And Fred and George haven't moved out of the Burrow yet so breadwinning wouldn't be an issue if Mr. Weasley were to perish. I can't see Mrs. Weasley being a valid character without her husband to contrast her tirades and balance her personality, so perhaps a Cruciatus to St. Mungo's with the Longbottoms? -p From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 16:32:07 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 16:32:07 -0000 Subject: An Exercise in Sugarcoating Voldys Blunderings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126988 John wrote: > But no, the silly cad had to bugger around with "making an > example" of the boy, ranting exultantly at his followers and > generally carrying on like a good sort. Before he knew it, the > lad had wriggled his way out of it again. > What excuses can one cook up for Voldy now? Was he perhaps out > of touch after not having picked up a wand for 13 years? It > certainly seems so. Thus, why not kill Potter while he's un-armed > and defenceless? The kid's pretty special, obviously; so why > give him any sort of chance at all? > Some have said that he wanted to show the lads that there was > nothing particularly special about the boy, nothing there to > fear. Yes, but much more than that. The whole thing was theater, pure and simple. Voldy gets by on reputation as much as magic--look how terrified people are to even say his name--he can't have it that a child beat him, he can't let that stand. Furthermore (reread his speech in the graveyard) he can't let it be thought by his followers that Albus Dumbledore has him scared, or can beat him. So he sets up a little play to edify his DEs. First he will snatch Harry right out from under Dumbledore's nose, and then he will kill him, Harry, in a "fair" fight, demonstrating that, despite a little setback, he's going to win, and you can be on his side and rule the Wizarding World, or oppose him and die. Sadly for Voldy, Harry missed his cue and blew his lines. I wonder if the loss of confidence some of his Death Eaters must have felt from that will be important later? Amiable Dorsai From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sat Apr 2 20:46:45 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 20:46:45 -0000 Subject: HBP cover Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126989 The pensieve drawing in the book OOTP is a deeper and rounder bowl than the one on the cover of HBP. Also DD's has no cracks on its rim and of course as stated many times his has no pedestal. Could this be an ancient pensieve - possibly the Potter or Black Family Pensieve? DD couldn't give it to Harry until he was was aware of the prophesy. Remember James left the invisibility cloak with DD and DD gave that to Harry his first year at school. James probably left family treasures with DD for safe keeping when he and Lily went into hiding. All the other book covers have one scene from the story. So Harry and DD are seeing the Dark Mark and three people but are the three people and Dark Mark a part of the same memory? Or Are there three separate memories that DD will show Harry? The kids (I teach) at school got me into the HP books this year. I read all five books over a three week period. Now going back and re- reading them all. This is my first experience waiting for a book. Never knew what I was missing! "B.G." From s_ings at yahoo.com Sat Apr 2 21:55:00 2005 From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 21:55:00 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Looking for A Few Good Elves! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126990 As all of you are aware, there's a new book coming out soon. No, no, we're not starting a party, we're looking for people to do some work. Do you have a couple hours a week to contribute to helping the list run smoothly? If so, you may be able to help us out. We're looking for elves to help us out with 2 specific tasks: 1. Welcoming new list members. This involves sending personal welcome e-mails to all of the people who join the list on your assigned day and entering the related information in a database. It also involves answering any questions that new list members may send you. If you're the kind of person who likes to help others, this may be the choice for you, helping new members get used to the way our group works and answering questions. 2. Participating in our daily list reading rota. You would read all the messages posted to HPfGU (the main list) on your assigned reading day, keeping an eye out for compliance to our list rules and noting non-compliant posts in the appropriate database. Are you a stickler for the rules, often noticing those posts that don't quite follow our rules? This might be the place for you. You may apply for one or both tasks, it's up to you. MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS An elf candidate must ? Have been a member of HPfGU in good standing for at least 6 months -- "Good standing" means that you are not on permanent moderated status. (Those few who are permanently moderated have been notified.) ? Have a good sense of HPfGU's posting conventions -- You understand the basic HPfGU standards of snipping, attribution, and courtesy. (You don't need to have the rules memorized, though.) ? Have good spelling, punctuation, and grammar skills -- You don't have to be a Master Linguist, but you should know the difference between a semicolon and a hole in the ground. :-) Non-native English speakers are welcome to apply. ? Have good communication skills -- It is important that you know how to express your ideas (especially disagreement) courteously and with clarity. ? Have good interpersonal skills -- Your fellow List Elves will come from a variety of backgrounds and have a variety of communication styles. You'll need to know how to get along with people you may not particularly like or understand, how to go along with decisions with which you don't necessarily agree, and how to be discreet (not reveal confidential list business to non-admins). ? Be reasonably level-headed -- You should be slow to react when insulted, slow to jump to conclusions, and quick to forgive misunderstandings. If you are in the habit of responding in anger (instead of waiting before posting), this might not be the job for you. Patience is definitely a virtue in HPfGU list admin; a sense of humor (especially in the face of the absurd) is mandatory. ? Score respectably well on the Percy scale -- If you have some perfectionist tendencies, you'll fit right in! ? Have no life -- Just kidding! However, we do ask that your real life not be so full as to prevent you from performing your elfly duties. (You can negotiate how many elfly duties you have.) We prefer that you commit to a minimum of six months in List Admin; however, you can don clothing sooner if the need arises. The ability to keep the rest of the Team supplied with eclairs is a bonus but is not required. :-) BENEFITS Becoming an HPfGU List Elf allows you to ? Blow your Harry Potter Obsession score through the roof. ? Imbibe all the butterbeer you want (except when on duty). ? Become the target of bitter and sometimes delicious insults, e.g., "Moderator Tart." ? Acquire a stylish new wardrobe of colorful tea cozies and lurid pillowcases. ? Get immediate first aid for ears-in-the-oven-door slammings, hand ironings, foot-in-blender jammings, and other self-inflicted punishments. If a large number of candidates apply, it may not be possible to accept every qualified candidate right away. Every application will be acknowledged, and we'll keep the applications on file for future consideration unless you notify us otherwise. You can find the Elf Enslavement Application (EEA.txt) at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/ The application includes instructions on where to send the application. The deadline for sending in applications is Friday, 15 April 2005, 00:00 (midnight) Greenwich Mean Time. Best regards, The HPfGU List Administration Team From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 00:38:14 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:38:14 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126991 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "orqad7" wrote: I had a look a previos artwork and think I may have found some similarities between characters on the new cover and those seen previously. To have a look for yourselves visit www.hogwarts- gallery.org and select the books link. Previous arguments suggest that it can't be Ron and Hermione on the left because Ron doesn't look like that. However upon inspection of the artwork for 'November,page 4' this is definitely the way GrandPre draws them. Now for the person on the right. This one was tricky. Have a look on page 2, the picture from chapter 25 from OotP. Similarities? I think so. What was Harry doing in chapter 25 you ask. Well, he was on a date with Cho Chang!! Conclusion I think that the characters appearing on the new cover are; Harry Dumbledore Ron and Hermione and Cho Chang!!!! vmonte responds: I thought Cho was a brunette. :) vmonte You are invited to join Snitch (group start date 4/1/05) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/snitch-/ From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Sun Apr 3 00:50:51 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 08:50:51 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: <1112458427.6633.16724.m12@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112458427.6633.16724.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126992 Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only child? * His parents are too inbred to produce more children. (Consider how similar their nordic looks are.) * His parents are trapped in a loveless marriage. (Arranged marriages would fit with the bloodlines obsession.) * His parents chose not to have more children. (Draco, like the others in his year, was conceived and born almost at the height of the last war. Perhaps fewer people chose to have children at that point? That would explain why there seem to be more students in the school overall than can be accounted for by multiplying the number of kids in Harry's year.) * His father has a war wound. (Consider the impact of an ill-aimed jellylegs curse. No really.) * He had siblings who were squibs who were subject to infanticide. (Imagine the reaction of Draco's folks if they had a child like Neville). * He has siblings who are much older than him or much younger, so Harry has not yet noticed them. Any other thoughts? Emma From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 00:48:40 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:48:40 -0000 Subject: HBP cover In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126993 B.G. wrote: The pensieve drawing in the book OOTP is a deeper and rounder bowl than the one on the cover of HBP. Also DD's has no cracks on its rim and of course as stated many times his has no pedestal. Could this be an ancient pensieve - possibly the Potter or Black Family Pensieve? DD couldn't give it to Harry until he was was aware of the prophesy. Remember James left the invisibility cloak with DD and DD gave that to Harry his first year at school. James probably left family treasures with DD for safe keeping when he and Lily went into hiding. All the other book covers have one scene from the story. So Harry and DD are seeing the Dark Mark and three people but are the three people and Dark Mark a part of the same memory? Or Are there three separate memories that DD will show Harry? The kids (I teach) at school got me into the HP books this year. I read all five books over a three week period. Now going back and re- reading them all. This is my first experience waiting for a book. Never knew what I was missing! vmonte: I think what is happening on the right is a memory of GH involving Lily. On the left may be happening in real time. The author seems to have focused on 2 separate instances of the dark mark. One a memory from the past and the other an image which will appear in HBP. I wonder if Ron's parents are going to be killed? Yeah, I got hooked much the same way you did. vmonte You are invited to join Snitch (group start date 4/1/05) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/snitch-/ From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 00:55:54 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 00:55:54 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126994 -p wrote: Don't forget - Weasley's Wizarding Wheezes is turning quite a profit. And Fred and George haven't moved out of the Burrow yet so breadwinning wouldn't be an issue if Mr. Weasley were to perish. I can't see Mrs. Weasley being a valid character without her husband to contrast her tirades and balance her personality, so perhaps a Cruciatus to St. Mungo's with the Longbottoms? vmonte responds: Yeah, I wonder if the cover of the HBP is showing Ron looking up at the sky. He sees the dark mark, but doesn't yet realize that it's over his parents house in the Burrow. So on the right of the book you see Lily, just before Harry became an orphan; and then on the left you have Ron, who has yet to realize that his parents are going to die. vmonte - feeling rather morbid tonight. You are invited to join Snitch (group start date 4/1/05) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/snitch-/ From McGregorMax at ec.rr.com Sat Apr 2 22:59:19 2005 From: McGregorMax at ec.rr.com (mcmaxslb) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 22:59:19 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126995 orqad7 wrote: > I think that the characters appearing on the new cover are: > Harry, Dumbledore, Ron and Hermione and Cho Chang!!!! I doubt that the third figure is Cho Chang. JKR has said that Harry and Cho relationship is over and I don't think that we will see very much of Cho in HBP. Her role was to be Harry's first crush and now that it is over I don't see a place for her. So it is not very likely Cho would in the first bit of art work promoting HBP. "mcmaxslb" From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 01:01:50 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 17:01:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050403010150.58353.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 126996 --- Emma Hawkes wrote: > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is > Draco an only child? I always chalked it up to that the Malfoys considered it too 'common' to breed like little rabbits, like the Weasleys and therefore just had one kid. That is MHO, Laurie From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sat Apr 2 22:32:47 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 22:32:47 -0000 Subject: Future Professions -- Ginny Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126998 Steve/bboy: > she rambles from job to job until she eventually meets Prince > Harry in a nightclub and after a long courtship, marries him. Deborah: > Come on, Steve, she's already had one Harry in her life. And > anyway, have you got no ambition for the girl? The one she > meets in the nightclub is Prince William! No, no, no! Ginny doesn't want to find someone to take care of her and she'd never bow to the royal life. She'll no doubt manage the twins' business while they focus on inventing new products. Under her guidance they'll branch out all over the WW. Her girlhood crush on Harry will be over and she'll marry a man in the WW government and help him to become the Minister Of Magic. "B.G." From stanleys at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 3 04:05:27 2005 From: stanleys at sbcglobal.net (suehpfan) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 04:05:27 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: <20050403010150.58353.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 126999 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, laurie goudge wrote: > > --- Emma Hawkes wrote: > > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is > > Draco an only child? > > > I always chalked it up to that the Malfoys considered > it too 'common' to breed like little rabbits, like the > Weasleys and therefore just had one kid. > > That is MHO, > > Laurie Sue perks up and wanders in for a minute...This has always bothered me too. I find it interesting that not only the Malfoys but also the Crouchs have only one child. Maybe there is a problem in some families with fertility because they are simply too inbred? Perhaps it is because they are so self centered they choose to have only one, as more than that would cut into their extra-curriculars. Or maybe, like the Dursleys, they want to pour all of their energy into one child to be sure he is as obnoxious as possible. Draco just wouldn't be Draco if he had to share his toys with someone else. Sue(hpfan)...done pondering for the evening. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sun Apr 3 05:33:20 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 05:33:20 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127000 Emma Hawkes wrote: Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only child? Laurie I always chalked it up to that the Malfoys considered it too 'common' to breed like little rabbits, like the Weasleys and therefore just had one kid. That is MHO Sue perks up and wanders in for a minute...This has always bothered me too. I find it interesting that not only the Malfoys but also the Crouchs have only one child. Maybe there is a problem in some families with fertility because they are simply too inbred? Perhaps it is because they are so self centered they choose to have only one, as more than that would cut into their extra-curriculars. Or maybe, like the Dursleys, they want to pour all of their energy into one child to be sure he is as obnoxious as possible. Draco just wouldn't be Draco if he had to share his toys with someone else. Sue(hpfan)...done pondering for the evening. AFAWK, James had no siblings, so it's not just the "bad guys". We know the Creeveys have at least two sons, and the Blacks had two boys on one branch and three girls on another. My guess is that it is common in the WW to have small families. At least, I suspect that is what JKR would say when the real reason is to keep the number of characters to a manageable level :-) Remember the Weasley cousin and Hermione's sister that were deleted in the editing. Ravenclaw Bookworm From tmar78 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 05:42:06 2005 From: tmar78 at yahoo.com (tyler maroney) Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 21:42:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: <1112496689.16742.50377.m20@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20050403054206.9115.qmail@web14127.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127001 Emma wrote: * His parents are too inbred to produce more children. (Consider how similar their nordic looks are.) I kinda doubt it. Althought that might be the case with the Crabbes and the Goyles! :) * His parents are trapped in a loveless marriage. (Arranged marriages would fit with the bloodlines obsession.) Good prospect. I can't imagine Lucius truly loving someone, but I can see him entering into an arranged marriage out of a sense of duty (i.e. keep the bloodline going and keeping it pure). * His parents chose not to have more children. I think this is very likely as well, but not for the reason listed. Neither Lucius nor Narcissa strikes me as being naturally parental. Maybe having one kid was all they could stand? * His father has a war wound. (Consider the impact of an ill-aimed jellylegs curse. No really.) LOL! I would love it if that turned out to be the case. Tyler www.redmeat.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates. http://personals.yahoo.com From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sun Apr 3 05:46:51 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 05:46:51 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127002 Andromeda I, too, would not be surprised to see a Weasley or two culled in book six. I can only hope it's Percy. Like most people, I'm fond of the twins, despite the fact that they tend to do more harm than good, and I do have some sympathy for the sometimes annoying Molly. I can't decide if she would be relieved to die before her children or need to be there to protect them in classic 'she-tiger-defending- her-young' style. Bill & Charlie do seem to be the most disposable Weasleys; where a death would wreak great havoc on the Weasley family but not so much on the reader. On the other hand, disposing of Sirius shows that Jo doesn't take that much into consideration, so I am again worried for the Weasley parents. Bookworm: In one of her interviews JKR said there would be more deaths. As many have said, theirs is such a large family it would be surprising for them all to survive. The possible foreshadowing that sticks in my mind is the scene with Molly and the boggart in OoP. While we/Harry was watching, Molly saw the "dead bodies" of every family member except Charlie and Ginny. Is Molly prescient and the boggart-bodies will die? Or will it turn out to be the opposite and Charlie and Ginny are the ones to die? Either way, one or two popular characters will go ? Ginny and the twins are probably the closest to Harry after Ron. Ravenclaw Bookworm From catlady at wicca.net Sun Apr 3 07:56:53 2005 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 07:56:53 -0000 Subject: ChoosingGoodnes/Snape/Albus/DragonMeat/Sex/Draco an Only Child /DE children Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127003 SSSusan wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126714 : << I think Nora's right in this. Look at Harry. He could easily have become a selfish, whining, angry bully based on his "inside" experience. But in fact he ended up quite different indeed from the example set within his family. And, since this appears to have developed in Harry prior to his entering Hogwarts -- without a whole lot of other "outside" examples for influence -- it's seems at least possible that Sirius experienced something similar. >> Harry had other influences than his home life -- television and school surely prominent among them. I think his school would have tried to introduce the students to certain moral virtues, whether by preaching about the Good Samaritan or assigning reading books about exemplary children. Vivian wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126772 : << By the way, should we start thinking that Snape was at Godric's Hollow too? >> Remember that dream Harry had after being Sorted? IIRC it involved Quirrel's turban, the Sorting Hat telling him to transfer to Slytherin, Draco, and Snape turning into a green flash and LV's shrill laugh? We know that the green flash and shrill laugh are what Harry remembered of the Godric's Hollow Event, and I fancy that Draco (who looks just like Lucius) and Snape in the dream come from Harry's unconscious memory of Lucius and Snape being at there with LV. Finwitch wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126878 : << What are we to make of Albus' hair being auburn at the age of 100 and completely white 50 years later? >> Maybe white hair is a symbol of rank for Headmasters; in GoF, Karkaroff had black hair in the Pensieve memory but white hair in real time. << Albino (blue eyes for humans, white hair, and no pigment whatsoever.. >> Albino humans have red eyes like albino mice. I think you're thinking of the white horses with blue eyes called Albino W to distinguish them from white horses with red eyes called Albino A. I read that about horses in a book when I was a child and, like whether pandas are bears, it may have changed since then. The white cats with blue eyes who are often deaf are called Dominant White or W, and the gene is said to be related to that causing Wartenberg's Syndrome in humans. << How did they ever end up in a situation where Albus doesn't know whether or not his brother can read?? >> I think that was just an Albus joke: I imagine that he knows perfectly well that his brother reads quite a lot. On the other hand, my DH says that his brothers can't read except they miraculously gain the ability when they're reading the Help Wanted ads or the Motors Manual. Jeanette wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126948 : << Would the dragon meat come from a wild dragon or as a side product of the dragonskin leather industry? Do they farm dragons or is there an elite group of hunters who supple the trade. >> There is a Dragon Reservation in Rumania where Charlie Weasley "studies" dragons. It seems to me more like a Dragon Ranch and Charlie's interaction with the dragons lent to the TriWizard Tournament seemed more like WRANGLING dragons than studying them. I think that the dragon leather, dragon meat, dragon heartstring, dragon blood, etc, are products of that Rumanian Dragon Reservation. Hans Andrea wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126951 : << This makes the point that there can be no sexual relationships on the Path of Liberation. This is a point also made in the Alchemical Wedding. The guests there are given the opportunity of sleeping with a beautiful virgin, but when they hold a raffle all the men get men. >> Of course pairing off all the men with men does not prevent all sexual relationships. Emma wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/126992 : << Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only child? (Snip) His parents are trapped in a loveless marriage. (Arranged marriages would fit with the bloodlines obsession.)>> I personally believe that Lucius and Narcissa arranged their own marriage, attracted by each other's bloodlines, shared ideas (e.g. pureblood superiority), good looks, and common goal (gaining power in the wizarding world). I think they work as a team and like each other more than either of them like anyone else. << His parents chose not to have more children. (Draco, like the others in his year, was conceived and born almost at the height of the last war. >> I like to think there was Another Prophecy, which became known to Voldemort or to Lucius Malfoy, which prophesied the birth of a child with great powers (meaning Harry) conceived at a certain time (I said Halloween 1979 but was told that was too long a pregnancy). In hopes that this child's powers would be used to serve LV or LM, due to be raised to be loyal to LV or LM, LV or LM ordered all his followers to go make babies at the prophesied time. That would explain why there are so many Death Eater children in the same year as Harry. Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott, we don't know if Parkinson pere and Bulstrode pere were DES, and we don't know if there's a Macnair in Harry;s year -- not all the names that start with M on the class list are legible. Anyway, part of my idea is that Lucius and Narcissa are still very young in wizarding years and were in no hurry to burden themselves with even one child, but the Other Prophecy intervened. Class List -- go to HPfGU webpage, go to Photos section, click on "Harry Potter and Me" folder. There are legible transcriptions of the names in some very old posts but the bookmarks are on my dead computer. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 09:16:59 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 09:16:59 -0000 Subject: Future Professions of Hogwarts Students - Drifting OT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127004 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "deborahhbbrd" wrote: > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > >major snip > > > Ginny is wealthy by association with her brothers, so she doesn't > > need a steady job, she rambles from job to job until she > > eventually meets Prince Harry in a nightclub and after a long > > courtship, marries him. Then again, maybe not. > > > > Aren't you glad you asked? > > > > Steve/bboyminn > And Deborah replies: > > Come on, Steve, she's already had one Harry in her life. And anyway, > have you got no ambition for the girl? The one she meets in the > nightclub is Prince William! Steve: (The year is roughly 2020) No... No... Hermione is dating Prince William, and after the weddings Ginny and Hermione divide their time between Managing the Princes' Royal Charitable foundations and running Harry and Ron's Charitable foundations. Because of the huge expansion of the Weasley business in both the magical and muggle markets, all the Weasleys, Harry, and Hermione are very rich from their early investments in Weasley Enterprises. Of course, Harry, Fred, and George are the richest of the lot, but Ron is a close second because he invested all the very substantial prize money that he won while working his way up to becoming the Wizard's Chess - Grand Master and World Champion. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - On a slightly more serious note, I do believe that at some point Fred & George's business will be successful enough that they are able, or at least, willing to pay Harry back the money he gave them. Harry being the good guy that he is will consider it a gift and refuse repayment no matter how much Fred and George insist. Consequently, Fred and George will simply decide to make Harry a silent partner in their business, and stash Harry's share of the profits in the bank until Harry is ready to take control of it. Harry and Ron will dabble in various jobs until Fred and George invite them both to take an active part in their now greatly expanded business. At that time, Harry will discover that Fred and George have stashed away a small fortune in profit-share in Harry's name. Aside from my slightly elaborate and highly speculative fanasies involving Royal pairings. I really do think that Harry will end up wealth as a part of his investments in Weasleys' businesses. When he is finally done with Dark Wizard chasing, he will be able to retire to a quite and comfortable life as part of what I call Weasley Enterprises. If should be obvious, that I really think that Fred and George's business will be extremely sucessful, and will branch out into a variety of ventures both muggle and magic. I see them becoming very promenent businessmen and one of the UK Wizard World's largest employers. - - - - - - - - - - - - - For a highly fantasised overly-imaginitive and slightly outrageous list of products that Harry and Ron have contributed to Weasley Enterprices, see this post... From: "Steve" Date: Tue Aug 31, 2004 6:01 am Subject: Re: Ideas- Weasleys' Wizarding Wheezies & Many Others http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/message/24105 Missing from the list are - -Ron Weasley Philosopher's Stone Chess Sets - Standard, Deluxe, Premium, and Custom-made (Ron's personal Custom Chess Set is made from Dragon Bones, not to be outdone, Harry's is made of Emerald and Ruby) -Ron Weasley Historical and Novelty Chess Set - House against House (like Slytherin vs Gryffindor), Battle of Gindelwald, Eastern Dragons vs Western Dragons, Battle of Voldemort, etc... -Ron Weasley's Red-Hot Meat Stick - Bar food- Like Slim Jims, spice peperoni sticks (and yes, it does carry some innuendo) -Ron Weasley's Ginger Spiced Mustard -Weasley Programmable Portkeys - Blend of muggle electronics and magic that makes safe easy-to-use affordable Portkeys available to everyone. Later expands into Weasley Transportation (like an international airline) and Weasley Travel (like any travel/vacation service) -Chudley Cannons - Ron and Harry are now the Owners. Plus they control all the food & drink concessions at the various national and international UK Quidditch stadiums -Publishing - with the assistance of a ghostwriter whose initials are JKR, they have published the adventures of Harry/Ron/Hermione in seven volume which have been printed in Comic Books, Serially in Witches Weekly, and in hard cover, as well as scripted for the stage. In addition, since Harry thinks that the Wizard World was very unappreciative of Mad-Eye Moody's sacrifices, he arranges to have the adventures of Mad-Eye published in comic book form and hard cover. All publication, especially since they crossed over into the muggle world, are generating substantial revenue. -Other Weasley products that can't be discussed in polite company There is a slim chance that I might have given this some thought. Steve/bboyminn (who hopes that despite the far-out fantasy, it still falls in the scope of what is allowable given that the current topic itself is highly speculative.) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 09:20:45 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 09:20:45 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127005 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Emma Hawkes wrote: > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only child? > > ...edited... > * His parents are trapped in a loveless marriage. (Arranged > marriages would fit with the bloodlines obsession.) > ...edited... > > Any other thoughts? > > Emma Bboyminn: I always thought is was simply a matter of having produced a reasonably sane and healthy male heir, and they decided to leave it at that. Like Laurie implied, once they had a male heir, there was no need to continue all that undignified loud hot sweaty breeding. Steve/bboyminn From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 12:20:48 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 05:20:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050403122048.47391.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127006 > --- Emma Hawkes wrote: > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is > Draco an only child? Maybe they're still trying? Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 13:42:14 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 13:42:14 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127007 Hannah wrote: > > Dumbledore's rewarding or overlooking > > Harry's blatant disobedience to rules, > > while acknowledging (in Book 4) his own > > ambiguous moral compass ("It is my belief > >. that truth is generally preferable to lies.") > Eggplant replied: > You've lost me, I find it hard to believe you disagree with what > Dumbledore said. > Ginger adds: I can't answer for Hannah, but I think I can see where it could be considered ambiguous. I read it as "Truth is generally preferable to lies" meaning that one should, as a general rule, tell the truth, but that there are some circumstances where a lie is ok. "No, that dress doesn't make your butt look big." "Yes, Aunt Zelda, we loved the cookies you sent. We shared them with friends and they were begging for more." Leave out the fact that the friends were Spot and Rover. In that sense, I would agree with DD. Another way of reading it, which may or may not be what Hannah saw in his words, is that lying is ok if the truth is too bothersome or if it could get you in trouble. Perjury, false insurance claims, con jobs, and things of that nature are not what I'd call morally proper, but I don't think that's what DD meant. I once had a boyfriend who never lied; he "facilitated communication". That is, he told people whatever they wanted to hear, regardless of the truth, so they would leave him alone. And that's why he's alone now. ;o) DD seems straight-forward enough unless it is something he feels needs to be kept under wraps. I think if he lies, it is by omission, or by allowing people to draw their own false conclusions, which is another moral kettle of fish. Just my thoughts, Ginger, who knows darn well that it isn't the dress's fault. From vmonte at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 13:45:43 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 13:45:43 -0000 Subject: ChoosingGoodnes/Snape/Albus/DragonMeat/Sex/Draco an Only Child /DE children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127008 Vivian wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126772 : << By the way, should we start thinking that Snape was at Godric's Hollow too? >> Catlady wrote: Remember that dream Harry had after being Sorted? IIRC it involved Quirrel's turban, the Sorting Hat telling him to transfer to Slytherin, Draco, and Snape turning into a green flash and LV's shrill laugh? We know that the green flash and shrill laugh are what Harry remembered of the Godric's Hollow Event, and I fancy that Draco (who looks just like Lucius) and Snape in the dream come from Harry's unconscious memory of Lucius and Snape being at there with LV. vmonte again: Oh, you're good. Both Snape and Lucius then??? That must have been some night. Wasn't Snape wearing the turban in that dream? What could that mean? Vivian You are invited to join Snitch (group start date 4/1/05) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/snitch-/ From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 04:36:31 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 04:36:31 -0000 Subject: An Exercise in Sugarcoating Voldy's Blunderings Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127009 John, with a Voldy-like rant said: >Held, by the general population of HPFGU, that Voldy be guilty >beyond reasonable doubt on four counts of "being a bungler", as well >as a fifth of "generally failing to live up to expectations as bad- >ass-evil-overlord-of the WW." >We're most of us pretty scornful of Voldy's efforts so far. Four >times, now, he's allowed a teenage boy to escape his slippery coils >and, basically, lost all credibility where it comes to this evil >overlord caper. >Big Snip >Summation: >Well, it isn't particularly encouraging, but if you look at things >from a slightly warped perspective you can *sort of* see some method >to his madness. And give him credit where it's due; he's a fairly >determined sort, and as the scene at the end of OOTP shows, he's >still very much sane, where a lot of people would perhaps be >otherwise. I'd say he goes into Voldy War Two looking pretty good; >he just hasn't been able to finish off that slippery blighter >Potter, that's all. >So, still guilty on all five charges? Bonnie now: I have to agree Voldy is "very determined", I'm not so sure about the "sane" part. I'm wondering if his elevator goes to the top floor. Wouldn't a normal lad pack his bags and go to the beach or something? Surely he has enough galleons to fund a good vacation. Let's face it, by now he must be permanently obsessed with defeating Harry in a major big showy way. He has to to save face. I wonder if being King of the WW is even his motive anymore. All Voldy wants is to get rid of Harry. If I were in his evil shoes, I would kidnap Hermione or Ginny. As has been shown Harry does have a "saving people" problem. His plan almost worked in OOTP. We know Harry would be off to save whoever, even if he did know he was being set up. Voldy just needs to find a better crew of helpers, or oversee them better. Maybe deep down under his slimy skin Voldy is secretly terrified of confronting Harry personally yet again, one on one. Maybe that's why he keeps putting it off. Voldy has a huge procrastination problem. He doesn't want to become "VaperVoldy" again. That was a really unpleasant experience. I say subconsciously he's really really scared of Harry. Bonnie From mfterman at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 12:53:46 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 12:53:46 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127010 I don't know how many Weasleys we're going to have killed off. Too many would lose the impact after a while. I figure one is almost a certainty, whereas two is possible and three is pushing it. 1. Percy His death would fill the rest of the family with an extreme amount of guilt. Why Voldemort would have him killed is somewhat difficult to imagine, unless they tried to turn him and killed him when he refused to accept their offer of power. Still, it would be a powerful motivation for the rest of the Weasley family to strike against Voldemort afterwards. Even Harry would be impacted. 2. Fred or George Would certainly make the surviving twin much more grim, and having one of the cheerful Weasley brothers killed would make for a very dark note indeed in the books. 3. Arthur His death would be devastating, as the near miss in book five indicated. For sheer power in some ways he's even stronger than Fred or George but the twins have numbers on him. As for the others, Bill and Charlie are too remote presences, on the flip side their deaths would do little to disrupt the narrative. Still, the above are my favorite candidates. -mfterman From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 08:50:28 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 08:50:28 -0000 Subject: Snape's Stubbornness Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127011 I suppose you all may have discussed this before, but for the life of me I can't understand Snape. I've been reading POA again. At the end Snape is so certain that Sirius is the bad guy and refuses to listen to any explanation that goes against his ideas. He refuses to even listen to or consider Hermione or Harry's evidence, to the point of childishness. Yet we know that at the end of GOF he is told the truth by DD. In OOTP Snape is in the Order with Sirius. Snape at some point must have realized he was dead wrong about Sirius. When Sirius dies in OOTP, surely you would expect Snape to soften up, but he still treats Harry badly when they meet by the front doors at the end of the book. Why doesn't he stop to think he may have been wrong about other things also? Like his attitude toward James and Harry and Lupin. In chapter 21 of POA: " 'You surely don't believe a word of Black's story?' Snape whispered, his eyes fixed on Dumbledore's face. .......'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen,' he breathed. 'You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' " How can someone hold a grudge for sooooo long? There's got to be more to it than that. It doesn't make sense. I don't trust Snape for one minute. His stubbornness and meanness to the students, Harry in particular is inexcuseable. Someone so mean minded cannot to my mind be a "good guy". I don't know why DD trusts Snape. JKR, I hope, will come up with something believable; but I think it's a very long shot. Looking at the problem from another angle, why does Snape trust DD? If Snape really believes as he seems to, why does he trust DD when DD so obviously trusts Harry? Snape's whole attitude is a great mystery to me and I can't figure out how it can possibly work out. Whether Snape turns out to be a bad guy or a good guy, I will have a million questions. Anyone out there with some ideas? Bonnie From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 3 16:33:57 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:33:57 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127012 > Hannah wrote: (actually, Hannah quoted) > > > Dumbledore's rewarding or overlooking > > > Harry's blatant disobedience to rules, > > > while acknowledging (in Book 4) his own > > > ambiguous moral compass ("It is my belief > > >. that truth is generally preferable to lies.") > > > Eggplant replied: > > You've lost me, I find it hard to believe you disagree with what > > Dumbledore said. > > > Ginger adds: > > I can't answer for Hannah, but I think I can see where it could be > considered ambiguous. > > I read it as "Truth is generally preferable to lies" meaning that one > should, as a general rule, tell the truth, but that there are some > circumstances where a lie is ok. "No, that dress doesn't make your > butt look big." "Yes, Aunt Zelda, we loved the cookies you sent. We > shared them with friends and they were begging for more." Leave out > the fact that the friends were Spot and Rover. > > In that sense, I would agree with DD. Hannah: Um... actually, that attribution is wrong, I never posted that paragraph, so I can't answer either! I replied to the original post, and perhaps forgot to write 'so-and-so wrote' at the top. Going upthread should give the original poster, I've forgotten who it was now. My post actually argued against what the comments now being attributed to me said! I personally think the HP books are very moral, which was what I said in my post, but I don't know much about philosophy or religion, so I'm not great at discussing these topics. I agree with Ginger about what DD meant - occasionally it is better to bend the truth for the sake of doing greater good - for instance, hiding Sirius because he was innocent, even though it meant lying. It's an interesting topic, but I prefer conspiracy theories any day! Hannah From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 3 16:47:43 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 16:47:43 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127013 "mfterman" wrote: > > I don't know how many Weasleys we're going to have killed off. Too > many would lose the impact after a while. I figure one is almost a > certainty, whereas two is possible and three is pushing it. > > 1. Percy > His death would fill the rest of the family with an extreme amount of > guilt. Why Voldemort would have him killed is somewhat difficult to > imagine, unless they tried to turn him and killed him when he refused > to accept their offer of power. Still, it would be a powerful > motivation for the rest of the Weasley family to strike against > Voldemort afterwards. Even Harry would be impacted. > > 2. Fred or George > Would certainly make the surviving twin much more grim, and having one > of the cheerful Weasley brothers killed would make for a very dark > note indeed in the books. > > 3. Arthur > His death would be devastating, as the near miss in book five > indicated. For sheer power in some ways he's even stronger than Fred > or George but the twins have numbers on him. > > As for the others, Bill and Charlie are too remote presences, on the > flip side their deaths would do little to disrupt the narrative. > Still, the above are my favorite candidates. Hannah: I like the format of your post, mfterman! Here's my take on it. I agree that at least one Weasley will probably die, with two being more likely and possibly three. If too many get killed off, as you say, it gets a bit much and the emotional impact actually goes down. And I really don't think JKR will kill that many principal characters. Maybe for that reason though, the ones she does kill will need more individual impact. 1. Arthur. I think at least one Weasley parent will go, and Arthur is more likely than Molly. Giving him a hero's death, successfully protecting his family, would soften the blow a little. 2. Bill or Charlie. I reckon one or the other is a cert. This would have the advantage of not being too directly upsetting for readers, as we don't know them that well, but of being very upsetting for their family. 3. Fred or George. I can't make up my mind. The idea of having one of these very close twins left on his own is horrible, but I don't think that means JKR won't do it. In a way, it would be better for both to die than one or the other. Tricky. I suspect they might both survive. 4. Percy. My gut instinct says he won't die, but I can't give much logical reason. I suppose I think that because Percy is a bit different from the other Weasleys, he may have a different part to play. But who knows? I don't think JKR will kill Ron or Ginny - they're too important and readers have too much emotional investment in them. Molly I think will also survive, because having killed Sirius, I doubt JKR will also kill off Harry's mother substitute. Especially since it looks like Lily Potter might get knocked off her pedestal in book 6 or 7. Hannah From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Apr 3 19:45:57 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 19:45:57 -0000 Subject: ChoosingGoodnes/Snape/Albus/DragonMeat/Sex/Draco an Only Child /DE children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127015 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: Catlady: > Remember that dream Harry had after being Sorted? IIRC it involved > Quirrel's turban, the Sorting Hat telling him to transfer to > Slytherin, Draco, and Snape turning into a green flash and LV's > shrill laugh? We know that the green flash and shrill laugh are > what Harry remembered of the Godric's Hollow Event, and I fancy > that Draco (who looks just like Lucius) and Snape in the dream come > from Harry's unconscious memory of Lucius and Snape being at there > with LV. vmonte: > Oh,Vivian, you're good. Both Snape and Lucius then??? That must > have been some night. Wasn't Snape wearing the turban in that > dream? What could that mean? Geoff: I don't think it was Lucius because Harry hadn't met him by then. The full quote is: 'Perhaps Harry had eaten a bit too much because he had a very strange dream. He was wearing Professor Quirrell's turban which kept talking to him, telling him he must transfer to Slytherin at once because it was his destiny. Harry told the turban he didn't want to be in Slytherin; it got heavier and heavier; he tried to pull it off but it tightened painfully - and there was Malfoy, laughing at him as he struggled with it - then Malfoy turned into the hook-nosed teacher, Snape, whose laugh became high and cold - there was a burst of green light and Harry woke, sweating and shaking.' (PS "The Sorting Hat" p.97 UK edition) From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 20:42:29 2005 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 20:42:29 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: <20050403122048.47391.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127016 > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is > Draco an only child? We don't know that he is an only child. Draco could have an older brother who graduated before Harry started at Hogwarts, a brother who embarrassed the family and who they don't like to talk about because he was chosen for Gryffindor. He could also have a brother or sister too young for Hogwarts. Eggplant From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 21:01:56 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 21:01:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's Turbin Dream (was:Re: ChoosingGoodnes/Snape/Albus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127017 >>Geoff: >The full quote is: >'Perhaps Harry had eaten a bit too much because he had a very strange dream. He was wearing Professor Quirrell's turban which kept talking to him, telling him he must transfer to Slytherin at once because it was his destiny. Harry told the turban he didn't want to be in Slytherin; it got heavier and heavier; he tried to pull it off but it tightened painfully - and there was Malfoy, laughing at him as he struggled with it - then Malfoy turned into the hook-nosed teacher, Snape, whose laugh became high and cold - there was a burst of green light and Harry woke, sweating and shaking.' >PS "The Sorting Hat" p.97 UK edition)< Betsy: So of course I'm going to run with this and posit that Harry's dream foreshadow's Draco being the Slytherin needed for the good guys to win (I refrained from calling him the "good" Slytherin, because it implies that all other Slytherins are bad - which strikes me as highly illogical.) Back to the dream: Either Voldemort is speaking to Harry directly (doubtful since Voldemort appeared to only learn of his psychic link with Harry in OotP *after* his attack on Arthur Weasley at the MoM), or Harry is dealing with his near brush with becoming a Slytherin and JKR uses this dream to hint at a few things. Harry, unconsciously recognizing that Voldemort is within Quirrell's turban and linking everything bad about wizards with Slytherin, follows a natural bridge from his peer Slytherin (Draco) to an adult Slytherin (Snape) to the ultimate evil Slytherin (Voldemort). But JKR may also be throwing in some meta stuff too. After all, Snape is *not* an evil Slytherin. He's a major part of the Order, and Dumbledore's right hand man (McGonagall would be the right hand woman). So maybe Draco is not going to be an *evil* Slytherin, and instead be just a Slytherin, maybe *the* Slytherin needed to help defeat Voldemort. Betsy, ever hopeful From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sun Apr 3 03:49:01 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 03:49:01 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127018 In an interview JKR simply stated that "Draco is an only child, can you imagine more Dracos". She also has expressed surprise that so many girls seem to like Draco. She went on to say that she thinks they like Tom Felton who plays the part but that Draco is not TF. This leads me to believe that Draco will be one to perish and she is concerned that kids are getting attached to the character. Or that they will continue to like him even as he becomes more evil. His character is a bit of a wimp in the last film but I don't read him that way in the books. He is following in his father's footsteps. -B. G. From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 03:41:41 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 03:41:41 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127019 > orqad7 wrote: > > I think that the characters appearing on the new cover are: > > Harry, Dumbledore, Ron and Hermione and Cho Chang!!!! > > Could it be Luna Lovegood? Isn't she going to show up again? She's been gaining importance, almost for no reason other than that one time at the end of OotP when she and Harry kinda clicked, and over the thestral thing, among other things. Maybe it's Neville and Hermione (I'm pretty certain one of them) and Luna or Ginny. I dunno. Chys From mcjuels at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 17:39:48 2005 From: mcjuels at yahoo.com (mcjuels) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 17:39:48 -0000 Subject: Imposter Moody's Motives Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127020 Okay. I never intended to detach myself from the woodwork and get involved, but here goes... I am re-reading Goblet of Fire and just finished the bit about the Unforgivable Curses. Why would imposter Moody want to make sure Hogwarts students know all about these? Why would he be advising "Constant Vigilance!" if he is actually a Death Eater? What were his true motives? If this is one of those subjects that has been debated ad-infinitum, I have no wish to start it up again. Perhaps someone could direct me to the appropriate posts and I can happily re-attach myself to the woodwork again. Juliane From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 21:57:08 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 21:57:08 -0000 Subject: Potter and Peanuts(was:Snape's unfairness was:Re: Snape and Raistlin Majere) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127021 >>Pippin: >But I still think Snape is more like Lucy Van Pelt in Peanuts. He's a crab and a fussbudget, and you could definitely say that Lucy is a sadistic little girl who abuses her power. But there's no indication that Lucy wants *more* power, and Snape doesn't seem to either. >OTOH, Charlie Brown could save himself a lot of grief if he just stopped running at the football...< Betsy: I initially cringed at this analogy because I'm not a huge Peanuts fan, and Charlie Brown and Lucy are my least favorite characters. Lucy is bossy, terribly so. And she's bossy for no real good reason. She generally doesn't have any more information than the other characters, but she *acts* like she does. Snape, on the other hand, *does* have information the other characters do not. That's why he's the teacher. So when he demands total obedience, it's for a good reason. And I'm not sure that Snape ever really *abuses* his power. Has he ever graded Harry unfairly, or given out undeserved punishments? Harry is also no Charlie Brown. Where Charlie Brown is dripping with self-doubt and lacks any self-esteem, Harry is pretty confident in himself and doesn't take attacks lying down. Actually, I think if Harry had been a bit more self-effacing when he and Snape first meet in Potions class in PS/SS, their relationship might have gotten off to a much better start. Betsy From allthingshp at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 03:44:45 2005 From: allthingshp at yahoo.com (allthingshp) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 03:44:45 -0000 Subject: Future Professions -- Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127022 about Ginny.... > "B.G.": > "Her girlhood crush on Harry will be over and she'll > marry a man in the WW government and help him to > become the Minister Of Magic. " Or become the minister herself!! allthingshp From catlady at wicca.net Sun Apr 3 22:22:37 2005 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:22:37 -0000 Subject: Hans-Pineal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127023 Hans Andrea wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126711 : << There are many other indications which point towards Dumbledore's office as the pineal gland >> I suppose the various times characters visit Dumbledore's office on school business is part of the story rather than alchemical symbolism (was it Dean who said that the Sorting Hat had told him that Harry had killed a basilisk with that sword on Dumbledore's wall? So Harry is not the only student who visits DD's office and converses with the Sorting Hat). Is there an alchemical meaning to Harry smashing stuff in Dumbledore's office in the end of OoP? To the portraits of deceased Headmasters? << The pineal gland is indeed the third eye >> << of all the connections between the chakras and the physical glands, the relationship between the pineal gland and the crown chakra is the most intimate one of all >> I was taught that 'brow chakra' is Another Name for 'third eye chakra'. I *think* that is what Catkind (see below) meant by saying: << Actually, a lot of traditions have the crown chakra associated to the pituitary gland and the brow chakra to the pineal gland. >> Were those traditions mislead by something more alchemical than the physical position of the first two eyes? Catkind (meow!) wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126738 as : << The chakras are usually given rainbow colours in order >> You've sent me back searching my memories (which might have been faster with a Pensieve instead of the Web). In the 1980s I attended a class given by a psychic healer named Reverend Rosalind something who had a training institute in Topanga Canyon (Web: Reverend Rosalind Bruyere, Healing Light Center) and my recollection is that she said "You've all seen pictures of the chakras looking like a little rainbow. It's so pretty. Well, it's *wrong*" and went on to tell what color she sees each chakra as, which I've forgotten. When I said "sees", I mean literally, through her eyes -- being able to see auras is a pre-requisite for studying at her institute. And she had some connection between wavelenghts of light of those colors and wavelengths of sounds.... My real teacher in the 1980s (not just a weekend seminar!) assigned yet another set of colors to chakras, which I do not remember except for vague recollections that the crown might have been violet and gold and the throat might have been multi-color stripes. << Also biologically, the pituitary is itself controlled by the hypothalamus. Is that by any chance Dumbledore, Hans? >> D'you remember a book called POWERS OF MIND by 'Adam Smith' (who earlier wrote THE MONEY GAME and SUPERMONEY)? My recollection is that he's talking about stress-related diseases -- 'fight or flight' -- sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems -- and he says something about 'hypo' means 'under' and 'thalamus' means 'wedding bed' in Greek, so the order to flee or fight comes from under the wedding bed. "Very insightful, Dr. Freud." All this analysis of Weasleys has given me the silly idea that maybe Arthur and Molly chose seven as the number of children they wanted from the beginning because they wanted their own Quidditch team (like butcher Parkin). From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 22:40:51 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:40:51 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127024 >>Bonnie: >In chapter 21 of POA: >" 'You surely don't believe a word of Black's story?' Snape whispered, his eyes fixed on Dumbledore's face. >.......'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen,' he breathed. 'You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' " >How can someone hold a grudge for sooooo long? There's got to be more to it than that. It doesn't make sense.< Betsy: Because Sirius tried to *kill* Snape? You may as well ask why Harry's still upset about Voldemort trying to kill him. Do you think Harry's holding an unreasonable grudge? And to turn this around a little bit: Why was everyone so able to accept that Sirius was the traitor? No one visited him in prison. Dumbledore did nothing to get Sirius a trial. I think it's because Sirius had already shown himself capable of great cruelty with his dealings with Snape *and* Lupin for that matter. He was willing to not only lead a fellow student to his death, but turn someone he thought of as a friend into a weapon. (If Snape had died, or even just became a werewolf himself, what would Lupin's punishment have been, I wonder?) It's also interesting to me that James redeemes himself and wins both Dumbledore's approval, and quite possibly Lily's love by pulling away from Sirius' influence. It was in an attempt to entertain Sirius that James sexually humiliated Snape. James was willing to go quite far in dominating a peer he disliked. Sirius was obviously willing to go further. Why isn't Sirius more sheepish when he deals with Snape? This is a guy he almost killed and Sirius still acts like he's got the higher moral ground. >>Bonnie: >In OOTP Snape is in the Order with Sirius. Snape at some point must have realized he was dead wrong about Sirius.< Betsy: Why? Sirius still acts quite arrogant around Snape and we never witness an apology. Sirius may not have been Voldemort's man, but he doesn't seem to have changed much from the sixteen year old who almost killed Snape, at least as far as Snape's seen. The very fact that Snape worked to try and help save Sirius in the end of OotP suggests that Snape may very well be the better man. Betsy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 23:06:14 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:06:14 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127025 Bonnie: > In chapter 21 of POA: " 'You surely don't believe a word of Black's story?' Snape whispered, his eyes fixed on Dumbledore's face. .......'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of sixteen,' he breathed. 'You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' " How can someone hold a grudge for sooooo long? There's got to be more to it than that. It doesn't make sense.< Betsy: Because Sirius tried to *kill* Snape? You may as well ask why Harry's still upset about Voldemort trying to kill him. Do you think Harry's holding an unreasonable grudge? Alla: As Nora said once - round 45654757438393 in this argument. Let's do it. :) I find your analogy to be flawed, Betsy. We KNOW that Voldemort tries to kill Harry. We SAW it quite a few times in the text. There is no ambiguity whatsoever that Voldemort wants Harry dead. We even know now WHY Voldemort wants Harry dead. The certainty of the asumption that Sirius tried to kill Snape that night to me does not even come close to Voldemort and Harry Bonny, I agree with you. I cannot make much sense of Snape's grudge yet at all, because there are SO many holes in the events that night. I sure hope that JKR will fulfill her promise of the backstory of the Prank. We KNOW that Sirius told Snape that if he goes to Shack, he will learn about Remus' whereabouts. Why? Why did Snape listen? Why did he go? Why did Sirius say that in the first place? Why WAS Snape so curious about Remus whereabouts in the first place? I am more and more inclined to share the speculation that Snape already figured out who Remus was,when he was rereading that question about werewolves in the Pensieve scene and if he DID figure it out, the question why he went there in the first place becomes even more pressing. I mean if Snape gives same question on the test in poA, surely there is something significant about it. Betsy: He was willing to not only lead a fellow student to his death, but turn someone he thought of as a friend into a weapon. (If Snape had died, or even just became a werewolf himself, what would Lupin's punishment have been, I wonder?) Alla: Remus reaction in the Shack seems to be very unconcerned when he talks about the event. Why? Betsy: It's also interesting to me that James redeemes himself and wins both Dumbledore's approval, and quite possibly Lily's love by pulling away from Sirius' influence. Alla: I'd like to know what are you basing this assumption on? Do you mean after school or while still in Hogwarts? If you are talking about Hogwarts times, then may I submit that we don't know who was more under whose influence. James and Sirius were like brothers. James' family gave Sirius a shelter when he run away from home. Isn't it possible that James influenced Sirius much more than Sirius him? If you are talking about after Hogwarts time, then I see even less signs of James pulling away from Sirius. he named him Harry's Godfather, he was present at the Cristening. James asked Sirius to become a Secret Keeper. I don't see any signs of them parting the ways. Just my opinion of course, Alla From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 23:49:10 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 16:49:10 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050403234910.74491.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127026 > Betsy: > He was willing to not only lead a fellow student to his death, but > turn someone he thought of as a friend into a weapon. (If Snape > had died, or even just became a werewolf himself, what would > Lupin's punishment have been, I wonder?) > > Alla: > > Remus reaction in the Shack seems to be very unconcerned when he > talks about the event. Why? Well, Pippin would say it's because he's ESE!Lupin and has a hidden agenda. I disagree with that (although find it wildly entertaining). The short answer to the question, IMO, is because Lupin had other things on his mind at the time like revealing Pettigrew and was only recounting past history. I do think it likely that the aftermath of the Prank was a very difficult time for the Marauders. There was bound to be awkwardness and hurt feelings between Sirius and Lupin, and James would have had a douse of cold water thrown over him too. And I don't care what Snape was like as a teen - Sirius knew perfectly well that if Lupin encountered anyone in werewolf form he'd kill or maim or infect them. Maybe Snape was a nosy Parker but there is absolutely no excuse for deliberately sending someone in harms' way when you know what the outcome would likely be. It was a bad thing to do to Snape and an unbelievably terrible betrayal of Lupin. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 23:57:02 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:57:02 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <20050403234910.74491.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127027 Magda: And I don't care what Snape was like as a teen - Sirius knew perfectly well that if Lupin encountered anyone in werewolf form he'd kill or maim or infect them. Maybe Snape was a nosy Parker but there is absolutely no excuse for deliberately sending someone in harms'way when you know what the outcome would likely be. It was a bad thing to do to Snape and an unbelievably terrible betrayal of Lupin. Alla: Well, obviously I DO care what Snape was like as a teen - because I think that it may explain a lot, but I also disagree with "deliberately sending someone in harm's way" wording. Maybe its semantics, but I think that we have absolutely no proof so far that Sirius sent Snape there. Did Sirius deliberately told him? Most likely, but unless Snape was under Imperio, he went there under his own free will. Do I applaud Sirius for what he did? Of course not, but there is a huge difference between saying something provocative and sending someone to meet their possible death. Just my opinion, Alla From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sun Apr 3 23:59:10 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 00:59:10 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4250834E.4090507@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127028 dumbledore11214 wrote: > Of course not, but there is a huge > difference > between saying something provocative and sending someone to meet > their possible death. Yep, so Harry should stop blaming Snape for Sirius' death. :-) Irene From t.forch at email.dk Mon Apr 4 00:05:14 2005 From: t.forch at email.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 02:05:14 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20050404020112.00ec4970@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 127029 At 03:49 03-04-05 +0000, B.G. wrote: >In an interview JKR simply stated that "Draco is an only child, can >you imagine more Dracos". World Book Day Festival on-line chat >His character is a bit of a wimp in the last film but I don't read >him that way in the books. He is following in his father's footsteps. I think that, if anything, the films are underplaying his cowardness . . . Recall also that Rowling values courage very highly. Draco, who Harry's opposite, must, for literary reasons, be as lacking in this quality as Harry is possessing it. Troels Forchhammer From juli17 at aol.com Mon Apr 4 02:41:58 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:41:58 EDT Subject: Snape's Stubbornness Message-ID: <149.429d3613.2f820376@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127030 Bonnie wrote: > How can someone hold a grudge for sooooo long? There's got to be > more to it than that. It doesn't make sense. Julie says: I makes enough sense to me, given Snape's personality. Some people hold grudges their entire lives. Think of family members who don't speak to each other for 20 or 30 years, let alone mere schoolmates like Snape and Sirius. (Though there may yet be a family connection revealed between Snape and Sirius.) Bonnie: > > I don't trust Snape for one minute. His stubbornness and meanness to > the students, Harry in particular is inexcuseable. Someone so mean > minded cannot to my mind be a "good guy". I don't know why DD trusts > Snape. JKR, I hope, will come up with something believable; but I > think it's a very long shot. Julie: Snape is pretty mean when he wants to be. But the Snape/Sirius thing is definitely two-sided. Even though Sirius knows Snape is on the side of good (we're assuming), he doesn't let up on Snape either. The two just hate each other. It happens, even between otherwise "good" people. Bonnie: > > > Looking at the problem from another angle, why does Snape trust DD? > If Snape really believes as he seems to, why does he trust DD when DD > so obviously trusts Harry? Julie: That's one question I'm most curious about! Not only why DD trusts Snape, but why Snape trusts DD. I fear we may not find out until book Seven, but whenever we do, I think it will explain a lot. Bonnie: > > Snape's whole attitude is a great mystery to me and I can't figure out how > it can possibly work out. Whether Snape turns out to be a bad guy or a good > guy, I will have a million questions. > Julie: I have to trust that JKR will answer a number of those questions satisfactorily. At least enough so that we better understand both DD and Snape's motivations in trusting each other. No doubt there will still be some questions left in the end, but there always are, especially for a character as complex as Severus Snape. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 02:44:49 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 02:44:49 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127031 Hannah wrote: Hannah: I like the format of your post, mfterman! Here's my take on it. I agree that at least one Weasley will probably die, with two being more likely and possibly three. If too many get killed off, as you say, it gets a bit much and the emotional impact actually goes down. And I really don't think JKR will kill that many principal characters. Maybe for that reason though, the ones she does kill will need more individual impact. 1. Arthur. I think at least one Weasley parent will go, and Arthur is more likely than Molly. Giving him a hero's death, successfully protecting his family, would soften the blow a little. 2. Bill or Charlie. I reckon one or the other is a cert. This would have the advantage of not being too directly upsetting for readers, as we don't know them that well, but of being very upsetting for their family. 3. Fred or George. I can't make up my mind. The idea of having one of these very close twins left on his own is horrible, but I don't think that means JKR won't do it. In a way, it would be better for both to die than one or the other. Tricky. I suspect they might both survive. 4. Percy. My gut instinct says he won't die, but I can't give much logical reason. I suppose I think that because Percy is a bit different from the other Weasleys, he may have a different part to play. But who knows? I don't think JKR will kill Ron or Ginny - they're too important and readers have too much emotional investment in them. Molly I think will also survive, because having killed Sirius, I doubt JKR will also kill off Harry's mother substitute. Especially since it looks like Lily Potter might get knocked off her pedestal in book 6 or 7. vmonte responds: Interesting! Personally, I think it's Molly. I think that her death will devestate the family, and force Ron to grow up. Vivian From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Apr 4 04:06:47 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 04:06:47 -0000 Subject: So, what is to become of Severus Snape? (LONG) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127032 We are coming up on the final two books, in which JKR has promised it is time to have some answers. Without doubt, the truth behind Snape is one many fans are craving. A related topic is his ultimate fate, i.e. where he will stand or fall at the end of the series. This is an attempt to summarize current theorize from this and other discussion sites. And to throw in a few snide comments of my own, of course. I see the main theories as: 1) EVER SO EVIL SNAPE: In this theory Snape will be revealed as thoroughly evil. Variants include Snape as a double agent and Snape as a slavering racist looking to set himself up as the next Dark Lord. I personally doubt we will see any such development. For one thing, although I know JKR is known for her plot twists, this would turn the story into a pretzel. For another, I think such a revelation would make Dumbledore look far too much like a fool. JKR has revealed Dumbledore's fallible side in OOTP. I doubt, however, that she plans to expand the extent of Dumbledore's fallibility THAT far. 2) HERO SNAPE: Snape will be revealed to be a critical component of the campaign against Voldemort and will be recognized for his heroic actions in bringing down the DEs. This is EXTREMELY popular in fanfiction, and has all kinds of corollaries and variants. Among them are OscarWinner!Snape, which holds that Snape's behavior is mainly because of his need to maintain his pose as a DE, and Harry'sPointofView!Snape, which holds that Snape is an honorable but strict teacher victimized by an adolescent point of view in the narrative. I also doubt this will turn out to be the case. Snape's hostility is too virulent and consistent to be a put on, and I really don't think JKR is setting him up to be a hero. Her own oft-expressed dismay at his popularity combined with the observation about the need to keep an eye on him hints, I think, at something much darker. 3) ALL ENDS AGAINST THE MIDDLE SNAPE: This holds that Snape is basically loyal to Dumbledore in that he believes Voldemort mad and dangerous, but that he does not agree with the Headmaster's philosophy. Instead, he essentially buys into the racism and elitism of the purebloods, and is playing things to his own ultimate benefit. A popular variant of this sees him working with Lucius Malfoy. I doubt seriously he is working with Malfoy, who I think is much wilier in fanfic than in canon, where he really does blunder around quite a bit rather like a rabid elephant. The overall thrust of this argument I think is rather plausible, however. 4) DANGEROUSLY TWISTED SNAPE: In this variant, Snape will remain loyal to Dumbledore, but his inability to put aside his grudges will lead to disaster. Some see the failure of Occlumency in OOTP as a foreshadowing. Others think that the problems arising from Harry's inability to trust Snape in OOTP will be mirrored by disaster arising from Snape's inability to trust Harry in later books. Personally, I think this is the most plausible direction for the Potions Master. Certainly their has been a lot of groundwork laid for such a development. 5) REDEMPTIVE BUT BITTER AND UNHEROIC SNAPE: This possibility, which has recently been kicked around at Sugar Quill, holds that Snape may end pretty much as he began (in terms of the series). The gist of it is that Snape is working for Dumbledore in order to atone for his deeds as a DE, but that he is a bitter and twisted man undeserving of rewards simply because he finally acted like a decent human being. You don't give medals to criminals just because they don't break the law anymore. Snape has sinned, and Snape must pay. When he has paid he will be allowed to remain free and to stay underground and out of sight in his dungeon where he belongs, and where he will be quickly and deservedly forgotten. Glory properly goes to much more honorable and untainted figures, including Sirius Black and The Boy who Lived. Some support for this can be found in Dumbledore's mild response to Harry's hatred of Snape. Dumbledore insists that Harry uses proper titles, and points out errors of fact Harry has made, but never chastises the boy for his general attitude or behavior toward Snape. In some ways, Dumbledore can be seen as sending a subtle but powerful message that Snape is not a good or likeable person, and that Harry is quite right to hold the man in contempt. I doubt this is where things are headed. I think that Dumbledore's interactions with Harry DO give some evidence that his attitude toward Snape is not entirely positive. However, my intuition is that JKR has a more definitive end for Snape than this. Anyway, that's a brief roundup. Additions, subtractions, and roars of rage are welcome. Lupinlore From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 22:49:08 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 22:49:08 -0000 Subject: Potter and Peanuts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127033 Betsy: > I initially cringed at this analogy because I'm not a huge Peanuts fan, and Charlie Brown and Lucy are my least favorite characters. Lucy is bossy, terribly so. And she's bossy for no real good reason. She generally doesn't have any more information than the other characters, but she *acts* like she does. Snape, on the other hand, *does* have information the other characters do not. That's why he's the teacher. So when he demands total obedience, it's for a good reason. And I'm not sure that Snape ever really *abuses* his power. Has he ever graded Harry unfairly, or given out undeserved punishments? > Harry is also no Charlie Brown. Where Charlie Brown is dripping with self-doubt and lacks any self-esteem, Harry is pretty confident in himself and doesn't take attacks lying down. Actually, I think if Harry had been a bit more self-effacing when he and Snape first meet in Potions class in PS/SS, their relationship might have gotten off to a much better start. Now Bonnie: Actually I believe Snape has "abused" his power frequently. What about all the times he emptied Harry's cauldron in Potions? What about all the points he took unfairly from Gryffindor, while letting Malfoy get away with murder. What about the time Hermione got zapped and her front teeth grew so Snape made the nasty remark about not seeing any difference in her teeth. What about the way Snape refused to listen to HRH in POA and was going to just turn Sirius over to the Dementors. I'm sure there are many many more examples. Snape is awful. I see no redeeming qualities there. As far as Harry being a bit more self-effacing, I would agree there except that I believe Harry needs his confidence or he would and will never be able to face the many challenges he needs to deal with. Charlie Brown would never have gotten past the Dursleys, let alone the experiences in SS. Also remember Snape sneered at Harry in SS before he'd even talked to Harry. He picked on him that first day in potions just because of who he was. If Harry had been more meek, Snape would have just been encouraged to lay on the abuse thicker. Bonnie, who thinks Snape is a scurvy rat. From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sun Apr 3 23:31:04 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:31:04 -0000 Subject: Sirius and Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127034 Betsy: Why? Sirius still acts quite arrogant around Snape and we never witness an apology. Sirius may not have been Voldemort's man, but he doesn't seem to have changed much from the sixteen year old who almost killed Snape, at least as far as Snape's seen. The very fact that Snape worked to try and help save Sirius in the end of OotP suggests that Snape may very well be the better man. BG: Why did Lily and James, Lily in particular, make Sirius Harry's God Father? Sirius seems one of those "Never left high school fellows". Even in OOTP Molly has to remind him that Harry is not James. And not even an adult James - he seems to want to be Harry's peer not his father-figure or mentor. He could have sent an owl reminding Harry of the two-way mirror instead of setting up a time to meet him in the fire. I think Sirius enjoyed the danger of it. As for Snape, he too seems to fall back into the teen-age mentality whenever he deals with Harry, Hermione, Lupin or Sirius. His actions towards Harry are most immature. And smart girls appear to annoy him, the way he ignores Hermione and then humiliates her in class is shameful. I wonder if she reminds him of Lily. From mfterman at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 23:39:04 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:39:04 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127035 We have a redheaded boy, a girl with brown hair, and a redheaded girl. We have the redheaded boy and the girl with brown hair standing close to one another. Now logically, unless we're recreating a specific scene from the book, we'd expect the most significant characters of the book to appear on the cover along with Harry. The most significant five characters as of the end of book five, besides Harry and Dumbledore are Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Neville and Luna, in approximately that order. Luna is a straggly blonde and drawn much different than the girl, and Neville is described as much different from the boy that appears on the cover. The simplest and best fit is Ron and Hermione on one side and Ginny on the other. Why is Ginny on one side all by herself? Well, it would unbalance the picture to have all three on one side. Second off, if you had Ron, Hermione and Ginny and had to break them into two on one side and one on the other how would you be likely to do that? Ron and Hermione are closer to each other than Ginny, and so it makes sense to pair them up. On the other girl's "ghostlike appearance", it should be noticed that Ron and Hermione are cut off at a certain point horizontally, and in fact the girl is cut off at the same level, it's just cut higher on her because she's shorter, and one of the things that has been mentioned about Ginny is that she's challenged in the height department. Having it be Ginny instead of Lily takes a lot less epxlanation. In short, I think a lot of people are trying to read too much into this. This is just showing some of Harry's closest friends, his inner circle, and the simplest and cleanest fit without any elaborate explanation is that it happens to be those three. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and in this case I don't think there's any mystery or surprise here. Some people may want there to be one, but in this case I think there's less here than meets the eye. mfterman From mfterman at yahoo.com Sun Apr 3 23:52:49 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 23:52:49 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127036 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > His character is a bit of a wimp in the last film but I don't read > him that way in the books. Draco isn't precisely a wimp, but up until the end of book five he has been kept on a tight leash by his father. Remember that Draco volunteered to help the Heir of Slytherin in the second book but his father told him to keep his nose clean. The Malfoy family, up until the end of book five, has always been about respectability. No doubt Lucius wasn't pleased with his son's getting detentions now and then for some of his pranks, but he could tolerate that since he was building his reputation among his fellow Slytherins. But Lucius I expect drew the line at being expelled. Draco was dead meat if that happened, and Lucius would not hesitate to use the Unforgivable Curses on his boy in that case. In short, Draco knew that his father would give him hell for doing anything that could get him expelled and so he kept his nose clean. Harry was always the one forced into positions where he had to put everything on the line. Draco was never under those pressures. If anything, the pressure was on him to play it conservative. As long as he kept his grades up and his nose reasonably clean, he would inherit the Malfoy fortune in time. That promptly ended with Lucius Malfoy captured by the Aurors and revealed to be a Death Eater. Even if Draco keeps his nose clean and graduates with a good number of OWLs and NEWTs, who cares? The Malfoy name is in the mud and no one will deal with the son of a Death Eater who clearly has been following in his father's footsteps. At this point, the only hope of restoration of the Malfoy fortunes is a victory by Voldemort. Draco Malfoy, like his father, now is utterly dependent on Voldemort for a restoration of what they have lost. And frankly, it doesn't matter now if Draco gets expelled from Hogwarts so long as Voldemort wins. Once Voldemort wins, it won't matter how dubious Draco's history is, as long as he has Voldemort's backing. Both Draco and Lucius, not to mention Voldemort realize this now. While this could be the fork on Draco's life, I think he made which fork he was on clear at the end of OotP. Draco clearly loves his father (he used the emotionally laden word "dad"). He's going to commit himself to the path of darkness now, and thanks to his father's capture, Draco has very little to lose now doing things that can be very dangerous. The only reason that he won't be expelled is because Dumbledore will no more allow Draco to be expelled any more than he would have let the Ministry expell Harry before. But his Prefect badge is not so secure. Even Dumbledore might decide that Draco can't carry out that position anymore, and Snape isn't going to back Draco at this point. His position on the Quidditch team is also going to be gone. His popularity among his peers is dead. Few will associate with the son of a Death Eater other than the other children of Death Eaters. So we have a boy who's lost almost everything at school, doesn't particularly care if he's expelled or not, and no longer has to hold himself back for respectability's sake. I expect that Draco is going to be persuing the dark arts and becoming a much more dangerous character for the last two books. I can see him being expelled in book six for various actions and arriving on the school grounds in the company of Death Eaters in open battle at the end of book seven. mfterman From noj_ivob at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 02:31:25 2005 From: noj_ivob at yahoo.com (Noj_Ivob) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 02:31:25 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127037 I have seen many people refer to a quote from JKR regarding a "good" Slytherin, so I was wondering if somebody provide the exact quote. I have searched for this quote for quite some time and I have yet to find anything. I don't want to not believe Jo said this, but I would feel much better if I was able to see the quote myself (or at least know what interview/chat session it came from). Thanks in advance. -Dan From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 04:42:16 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 04:42:16 -0000 Subject: So what is to become of Severus Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127038 Lupinlore: 4) DANGEROUSLY TWISTED SNAPE: In this variant, Snape will remain loyal to Dumbledore, but his inability to put aside his grudges will lead to disaster. Some see the failure of Occlumency in OOTP as a foreshadowing. Others think that the problems arising from Harry's inability to trust Snape in OOTP will be mirrored by disaster arising from Snape's inability to trust Harry in later books. Personally, I think this is the most plausible direction for the Potions Master. Certainly their has been a lot of groundwork laid for such a development. Bonnie Now: Okay, this is the most plausible IMO, but haven't we seen a variant of this in OOTP. A little corner of my mind still thinks Snape could have acted faster, or shown Harry he understood the problem. Snape is after all supposed to be the adult. Ha Ha Ha! It's very scary to think we might have to go through that whole scene again. Sometimes Voldy seems more human than Snape. At least he shows some emotion of sorts, other than contempt. Does Snape feel any real emotions, other than sorry for himself? I'm sure JKR will have some surprise up her sleave that will totally explain everything. I get so mad at Snape, I almost wish he would be the one to die. But that would ruin part of the fun wouldn't it. By the way, I think it's Lupin that will die next. Sirius was such a tragic figure, death was almost a release for him. Only Harry's lose made it so sad. Lupin strikes me the same way. Death would almost be a mercy for him. His life cannot be very fun. Of course now he has the Order to give him something to concentrate his efforts on. (Assuming he's a good guy) Bonnie From georgia_tassos at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 4 03:05:32 2005 From: georgia_tassos at sbcglobal.net (mallrat42g) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:05:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's Stubbornness In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127039 Bonnie wrote: > > I don't trust Snape for one minute. His stubbornness and > meanness to the students, Harry in particular is inexcusable. > Someone so mean minded cannot to my mind be a "good guy". I > don't know why DD trusts Snape. JKR, I hope, will come up with > something believable; but I think it's a very long shot. Maybe he dislikes Harry so much because he really likes him, and just looking out for him. Sort of the way you have a secret crush on someone by acting like you hate them. I'm not saying that Snape is gay, I'm saying that maybe he realised that his grudge with James and Sirius was childish, but is not man enough to admit it. He grew up, but not entirely. He really is protecting Harry, but doesn't want to look like a sap in front of every single person he knows, including the students. He has a reputation to uphold. Another thing, is that very rep he has. He is supposed to be a mean person, who was a Death Eater, and many belive he is faithful to Voldemort. It could be an act for all we know. "mallrat42g" From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 05:23:10 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 05:23:10 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127040 > > Alla: -- > Did Sirius deliberately told him? Most likely, but unless Snape was > under Imperio, he went there under his own free will. Do I applaud > Sirius for what he did? Of course not, but there is a huge > difference > between saying something provocative and sending someone to meet > their possible death. Finwitch: I quite agree. In fact, we don't even know exactly what Sirius told Snape, or if he was even talking TO Snape for that matter. In fact, the way things are, why would Snape and Sirius have even TALKED to each other long enough for Snape to get that information? For all we know, Sirius could have been talking with James about getting past the WW without the rat (who might have been in sick-bay or something, possibly due to Snape) and Snape just happened to overhear them. (And thought later that they set him up with a staged conversation!) And when Lupin said 'that trick', he's talking about Severus Snape making others look bad. (the 'forgotten' goblet and who knows what he did at school) Finwitch From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 4 05:44:58 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 05:44:58 -0000 Subject: Sirius Waste (was Re: So what is to become of Severus Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127041 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote> > Bonnie Now: > snip > By the way, I think it's Lupin that will die next. Sirius was such a > tragic figure, death was almost a release for him. Only Harry's lose > made it so sad. Lupin strikes me the same way. Death would almost > be a mercy for him. His life cannot be very fun. Of course now he > has the Order to give him something to concentrate his efforts on. > (Assuming he's a good guy) > > Bonnie imamommy: I must respectfully disagree. I don't see Sirius' death as a release at all. Actually, I see it as the frustrating culmination of a good life wasted and lost by external forces. Sirius was a strong man, not suffering from illness or infirmity of mind. He spent twelve years wasting away in prison, and was still able-bodied when he escaped, if perhaps a little emotionally unstable. Then he is imprisoned once again, this time by his friends' attempts to keep him safe. Undeniably, this is maddening, and he finds it hard to swallow. One could argue whether he might have been happier to still be in Azkaban, rather than his family's home. Yet there was hope for him; hope that someday soon Voldemort would be defeated, Wormtail revealed, the truth would surface and he would be free. Sirius' death is made more poignant by the fact that his was a vital, hopeful, strong life that never had the chance to fulfill its potential. Even more so because the one person he choses to gamble his freedom on is Harry. Why does he come back from the tropics during GoF to live off rats and read cast-off newspapers? Harry. Why does he let the Order set up shop in his kitchen? They need to protect Harry. Why does he go to the train station to say good-bye? Harry. Why does he welcome them all so warmly at Christmas time? Harry. Who does he go to help at the Ministry, thereby risking exposure as well as death? Harry. Sirius' love and devotion rests on Harry. On Harry he pins his hope for the future, and for Harry he would sacrifice everything, even to the giving of his own life. Was he perfect? No. But he did give his love, loyalty, and anything else he had to Harry and the cause of helping him. I do not see his death as a release for him, but as first the life of a good man, laid to waste in the wake of the first battle of VW2, and secondly, as a fulfillment of his feelings towards our boy hero. (Stepping off the soapbox now) I don't know about Lupin. I think his role is to be the one who carries the torment of watching those he cares about suffer and die, powerless to help. But I also think he serves a very significant diplomatic function, and still has uses that could be made of him. But yes, I see your point of his death being a release. Back to Snape, would his death be a release? Would it free him of the hate he carries? I don't think so. I think if it is not addressed in this life, he will carry it through to the next. He shall have the same spirit in the next life that he had in this one. If Snape is to die well, he needs to have some sort of closure on his issues. I am not saying he has to be redemptive, just that he has to make peace with himself. If he doesn't, I can see him as a good candidate for becoming a ghost. imamommy From georgia_tassos at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 4 03:19:00 2005 From: georgia_tassos at sbcglobal.net (mallrat42g) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 03:19:00 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127042 Dude, Ron is totally going to die! You can so tell. Ron biting the dust will totally piss Harry off to give him the power and anger to kill Voldemort. "mallrat42g" From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 06:00:24 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 06:00:24 -0000 Subject: Imposter Moody's Motives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127043 Juliane: > Okay. I never intended to detach myself from the woodwork and get > involved, but here goes... > > I am re-reading Goblet of Fire and just finished the bit about the > Unforgivable Curses. Why would imposter Moody want to make sure > Hogwarts students know all about these? Why would he be > advising "Constant Vigilance!" if he is actually a Death Eater? What > were his true motives? > > If this is one of those subjects that has been debated ad-infinitum, > I have no wish to start it up again. Perhaps someone could direct me > to the appropriate posts and I can happily re-attach myself to the > woodwork again. Finwitch: As I see it: 1) Keep up his cover. Remember, he managed to fool Albus Dumbledore, who was friends with real Alastor Moody. The children DO speak of his classes, all the time - (Fred&George calling it cool). Albus may have been watching invisibly occasionally (which the imposter would know via the magic eye - but Harry would have no idea, and thus we wouldn't). And of course, the rule of successfully keeping cover is to KEEP the cover even when you think no one is watching! 2) he's an addict on torturing... (or something. Crouch Jr. apparently cannot stop once he starts, unless stopped) Finwitch From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 4 06:02:19 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 06:02:19 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127044 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant9998" wrote: > > > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is > > Draco an only child? > > We don't know that he is an only child. Draco could have an older > brother who graduated before Harry started at Hogwarts, a brother who > embarrassed the family and who they don't like to talk about because > he was chosen for Gryffindor. He could also have a brother or sister > too young for Hogwarts. > > Eggplant imamommy: I think this quote indicates he is, but feel free to disagree: "A double line of embroidery linked Narcissa Black with Lucius Malfoy, and a single vertical gold line from their names led to the name Draco." (OotP, Scholastic p. 113) I think he may be an only simply because he is a he; Narcissa succeeded in producing a male heir to the Malfoy estate. Also, the more children they have, the more they have to get married into other pureblood families. And face it, even the Malfoys wouldn't want to have to have a daughter marry, say, Crabbe or Goyle. imamommy From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 06:23:32 2005 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 06:23:32 -0000 Subject: Imposter Moody's Motives. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127045 Moody didn't teach him anything about the imperious curse because you can't teach what you don't know. The fake Moody (and the real one too) took years to overcome the imperious curse and even then were only partially successful. Crouch senior, a pretty formidable character, also found it enormously difficult to resist. Harry, just a 14 year old boy, defeated the Imperious Curse completely in just a few minutes on only his second try. For some reason the curse was kid stuff to Harry, he wasn't taught how, it just came naturally, resisting it was easy. I don't think Moody was teaching, he was testing Harry to see how powerful he was. Eggplant From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 06:41:42 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 06:41:42 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127046 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" wrote: -- > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience > to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you > best." This cynical attitude of it's only wrong if you get caught may > well describe the "real world", but the argument is do we want to > teach our youngsters such values? The critiquer points to the amount > of rule-breaking and lying by Harry and his pals, the gradual > corrupting of Hermoine to share such situational values, and even > Dumbledore's rewarding or overlooking Harry's blatant disobedience to > rules, while acknowledging (in Book 4) his own ambiguous moral compass > ("It is my belief . . . that truth is generally preferable to lies.") Finwitch: Well, Right & Wrong is not, in my view, about rules or obeying. Mr Gandhi did nothing wrong in disobeying the British Laws. Acc. to Gospels, Jesus broke the rules set by some jewish authorities - like healing someone during the Sabbath... and historically, every early Christian was disobeying a Roman law forbidding the said religion. Possibly other religions have similar stories, but I don't know of them. A history book told me that the person who dropped the first atomic bomb to Japan, under orders, couldn't bear the guilt and killed himself - but he did obey rules. Sokrates asked questions the authorities didn't like (which also broke rules of then Greece) and called it 'spoiling/misleading the young'. If Harry Potter books teach any attitude against rules, it's about questioning them, just like Sokrates. And about Dumbledore: It is my belief that truth is generally preferable to lies -- well, I agree. One should be, in general basis, truthful. However, there *are* occasions where truth can and should be bent. One could lie in order to save a life (hiding some innocent, like Sirius).. Saying that Cedric was murdered by Voldemort - well, omitting his use of Pettigrew as a tool for doing it could be a lie, but it's much closer to truth than what the Ministry said. I'm not so certain whether courtesy overrides honesty, but of course, silence might be an option. Finwitch From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 4 06:56:28 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 06:56:28 -0000 Subject: Harry self-effacing? (Was: Potter and Peanuts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127047 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: Betsy: > Harry is also no Charlie Brown. Where Charlie Brown is dripping with > self-doubt and lacks any self-esteem, Harry is pretty confident in > himself and doesn't take attacks lying down. Actually, I think if > Harry had been a bit more self-effacing when he and Snape first meet > in Potions class in PS/SS, their relationship might have gotten off > to a much better start. Geoff: More self-effacing? What's the guy supposed to do? Lie on the floor and let Snape wipe his feet on him? Look at canon. What does Harry say to Snape in their first Potions class? '"I don't know, sir," said Harry...... .."I don't know, sir."...... "I don't know," said Harry quietly. "I think Hermione does, though, why don't you try her?"....' (PS "The Potions Master" pp.102-03 UK edition) That's hardly jumping up and down and saying "Look at me. Look at me. I'm the Boy Who Lived." What were Snape's responses to each of these answers respectively? '"Tut, tut - fame clearly isn't everything."..... ..."Thought you wouldn't open a book before coming, eh, Potter?"... ..."And a point will be taken from Gryffindor house for your cheek, Potter."' (ibid.) OK, Harry's third comment might have been interpreted as being fresh but I see it as him trying to get Snape off his back. Here he is, in a new school, first lesson in this subject and he is the target of unwarranted hostility, humiliation and sarcasm. Snape is also playing to the Slytherin gallery by the look of things. I remember my first week at grammar school when I was 11. We had a Woodwork teacher just like Snape and we were terrified to breathe in case he picked on us. None of us could do anything right..... From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 4 06:23:40 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 06:23:40 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20050404020112.00ec4970@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127048 B.G. wrote: >>His [Draco's] character is a bit of a wimp in the last film but I >>don't read him that way in the books. Troels Forchhammer wrote: > I think that, if anything, the films are underplaying his > cowardness . . . Yes, I think that Draco is the archetypal bully: full of it when he's surrounded by his friends and protectors, the phsyically indimidating Crabbe & Goyle, and sycophantic hangers on such as the giggling Slytherin girls, but a frightened coward when left to his own devices. Each time he's gone into the Forbidden Forest he's been clearly terrified Karen From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 07:29:36 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:29:36 -0000 Subject: Harry's Turban Dream In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127050 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > > > Vivian wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126772 : > > << By the way, should we start thinking that Snape was at Godric's > Hollow too? >> > Catlady: > > Remember that dream Harry had after being Sorted? IIRC it involved > Quirrel's turban, the Sorting Hat telling him to transfer to > Slytherin, Draco, and Snape turning into a green flash and LV's > shrill laugh? bboyminn: Although, I can't really add much to this conversation, I do want to point out the aspect of this dream that I find most interesting. Harry doesn't remember the dream. The dream itself has already been quoted in this thread, but here is the next line that comes after the dream. --- PS/SS - Am Ed, HB pg 162 --- ...there was a burst of green light and Harry woke, sweating and shaking. He rolled over and fell asleep again, and when he woke the next day, he didn't remember the dream at all. - - - end quote - - - Don't you find it odd that the author would give us, the reader, insight into such a strange dream, but not allow the character to remember it. I guess on one hand, that's not that uncommon, all of us frequently wake from dream, and the memory of those dreams quickly fade from out mind. So, it may have been nothing more than that. But still... it seems odd. Not worth much, but there it is. Steve/bboyminn From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 07:50:48 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:50:48 -0000 Subject: Mind-probing Boggarts (Re: Occlumency and aiki-waza (LONG!)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127051 > > > Pippin: > > Hmmm....I wonder, would a boggart-Snape be capable of legilimency? NOra: > Only if a boggart-Dementor is capable of Kissing someone, and we > don't know about that. Legilimency I doubt because that seems to > require an act of intent on the part of the caster, but...curious. I > wonder if she's thought it out. Finwitch: 1) A Dementor boggart is bringing up the same memories as a real Dementor - (for Harry: the death of his parents pre-Cedric-dying) - but it is safer than a real one (At least because Lupin could get it turn into the Moon instead). Boggart may well be weaker than a Dementor in this aspect, though... 2) Lupin feared of what a Voldemort!Boggart would do - kill the students? 3) Anyway, a boggart IS Legilemens enough to know what scares you. Like the Mirror of the Erised is with your desire. (Both could be used for practice! Mirror's better, right?) Finwitch From someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au Mon Apr 4 07:41:19 2005 From: someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au (Someone) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 07:41:19 -0000 Subject: My God, You Took an AK for Me! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127052 Just been watching a B-grade (even that's being kind here) action movie. You know the bit where someone-or-other leaps sideways, hollering "NOOOOOO!" at the top of their voice, to take a bullet in the chest for Wossname? It got me thinking. What exactly would happen were this rather fanciful scenario to be played out with AK curses rather then bullets? The curse is, by all accounts, "unblockable", so would the person intercepting it protect the individual at which the AK is directed, or would his or her foolhardy act cost them both their lives? It was Snape, if you want to be specific, that I was picturing as taking the AK (for Harry, naturally). John. From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 08:11:52 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 08:11:52 -0000 Subject: Harry's Turban Dream In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127053 Steve: > > Don't you find it odd that the author would give us, the reader, > insight into such a strange dream, but not allow the character to > remember it. > > I guess on one hand, that's not that uncommon, all of us frequently > wake from dream, and the memory of those dreams quickly fade from out > mind. So, it may have been nothing more than that. > > But still... it seems odd. Finwitch: It does indeed. Harry also begins to forget many of his scar-brought dreams... And there's the caged dream at the beginning of CoS. Both show what's going on, but the Turban-dream was obscure. What of the Flying Motorcycle - a dream Harry DID remember? Was it a dream OR a memory of his Flight to the 4 Privet Drive - as well as predicting Hagrid's arrival later? This dream-issue follows up with the Divination. Tea-leaves. (Harry's prediction was correct; it came true when Ron got his 'Scabbers back') - but particularly Trelawney's issued homework: Dream Diary. We might also remember that most of Harry's visions - those of Voldemort, with his scar hurting - have been TRUE. It might be that Harry has Seer-abilities, that come as dreams to him. His mistreatment over the Motorcycle Dream may have prompted him to forget those without his scar hurting... Hmm-- is this somehow linked to Neville forgetting things like passwords, books and such? I think Harry has Seer-abilities, and if he has a dream that's not a clear vision he forgets it. He just doesn't realise it yet - (and with Hermione's attitude on Divination, she's not helping) - but I think that in later books, Luna may do so. Or Neville. (who's sleeping in the same dorm). Or whoever gets Harry out of Privet Drive in HBP. Finwitch From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 08:27:30 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 01:27:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] My God, You Took an AK for Me! In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050404082730.66744.qmail@web53902.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127054 I wonder if the curse truely is unblockable. Fake!Moody said that if everyone in the class hit him with the curse all he'd get would be a nosebleed. I think it would be more as Beatrix Lestrange said about the Cruciatus curse - you have to mean it for it to really be effective. After all, Voldemort conjured the silver shield thinking that Dumbledore would try to kill him. Now we've seen that there are things that will block the curse - a golden statue for one. Also, we saw Fawkes take the curse for Dumbledore. So, it seems that if someone jumped in front of Harry, the curse may kill them but not Harry. Lynn Someone wrote: It got me thinking. What exactly would happen were this rather fanciful scenario to be played out with AK curses rather then bullets? The curse is, by all accounts, "unblockable", so would the person intercepting it protect the individual at which the AK is directed, or would his or her foolhardy act cost them both their lives? test'; "> __________________________________________________ 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 ehawkes at iinet.net.au Mon Apr 4 10:21:11 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 18:21:11 +0800 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127055 "suehpfan" This has always bothered me too. I find it interesting that not only the Malfoys but also the Crouchs have only one child. Maybe there is a problem in some families with fertility because they are simply too inbred? Perhaps it is because they are so self centered they choose to have only one, as more than that would cut into their extra-curriculars. Or maybe, like the Dursleys, they want to pour all of their energy into one child to be sure he is as obnoxious as possible. Draco just wouldn't be Draco if he had to share his toys with someone else. I wondered about family size too. Cedric Diggory doesn't seem to have any siblings (or at least none near enough him in age to be at school or to go to the world quidditch match). Is the usual family size small for wizarding people? Emma From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Mon Apr 4 10:28:39 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 18:28:39 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: <1112541677.16575.78690.m12@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112541677.16575.78690.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127056 > > >Emma wrote: > >* His parents are too inbred to produce more children. > (Consider how >similar their nordic looks are.) > >I kinda doubt it. Althought that might be the case >with the Crabbes and the Goyles! :) I like this thought. It might explain Pansy's pug dog expression too :-) > >* His parents are trapped in a loveless marriage. >(Arranged >marriages would fit with the bloodlines obsession.) > >Good prospect. I can't imagine Lucius truly loving >someone, but I can see him entering into an arranged >marriage out of a sense of duty (i.e. keep the >bloodline going and keeping it pure). Yes, and both Malfoys seem incredibly focussed on Draco rather than on each other. Emma From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 08:47:31 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 08:47:31 -0000 Subject: So, what is to become of Severus Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127057 Lupinlore: However, my intuition is that JKR has > a more definitive end for Snape than this. > > > Maybe he's the one that JKR intends to kill later, in mention that more will die, central to the story, and maybe he dies with no purpose, or perhaps he saves someone. Maybe an atonement thing. Chys From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 10:20:02 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 03:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] So, what is to become of Severus Snape? (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050404102002.22703.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127058 lupinlore wrote: > 4) DANGEROUSLY TWISTED SNAPE: In this variant, > Snape will remain > loyal to Dumbledore, but his inability to put aside > his grudges will > lead to disaster. Some see the failure of > Occlumency in OOTP as a > foreshadowing. Others think that the problems > arising from Harry's > inability to trust Snape in OOTP will be mirrored by > disaster arising > from Snape's inability to trust Harry in later > books. I tend to think (after reading all the books many times over esp. book three and five) that snape probably has some serious issues that have up till now not been worked on and allowed to fester. It wouldn't suprize me if he cannot get past how much he despises, loathes and destests everything around and to do with harry. I can see him being the kind of person who possibly did a re-think at the the end of VW1 and possibly came to a conclusion that it might be time to switch sides to (as some have suggested) attone for wrong doings in the past but when it comes to harry that is his acheillies heel. IMHO I can see snape either dying or being one of those bitter person become a bitter senior citizen who lives a looooooooooooooooong life and in the end only has his bitter feelings as company. that's just MHO laurie From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Apr 4 12:05:32 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 12:05:32 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127059 Dan wrote: > I have seen many people refer to a quote from JKR regarding a "good" > Slytherin, so I was wondering if somebody provide the exact quote. Potioncat: It isn't from a quote of JKR's (AFAIK) but rather a theory that there will be a good/some good Slytherin(s). One thought is that JKR has set us up with some stereotypes that she'll upset as the series continues. There are lots of places in the books where she's done something along that line. Another idea is that all those Slytherins couldn't have been evil at age 11 when they were sorted, therefore, some of them must be good. OTOH, JKR may very well be writing from the belief that courage is everything. Ambition is bad. It's nice to be clever, but it's better to be brave and it's really good we have those hardworking, dull people to do the real work. And she may be demonstrating that through the houses. This is fiction after all and no real child is actually harmed by the sorting. It sort of reminds me of "Brave New World". I'm in the Good Slytherin camp. I think there's a good chance Theo and Blaise will choose the DD side of the upcoming battle. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the "good" adults turn out to be Slytherin too. Potioncat From greatelderone at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 13:01:15 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 13:01:15 -0000 Subject: So, what is to become of Severus Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chys Sage Lattes" wrote: > > Maybe he's the one that JKR intends to kill later, in mention that > more will die, central to the story, and maybe he dies with no > purpose, or perhaps he saves someone. Maybe an atonement thing. > > Chys GEO: I very much doubt it. Judging by how Rowling has set up her universe, I think it would be very likely that Snape survives both Lupin who along with Wormtail are probably marked for death, but also Dumbledore and McGonagall all in order to become the next headmaster of the school. From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 4 14:30:42 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 14:30:42 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127061 > "mallrat42g" wrote: > > Dude, Ron is totally going to die! You can so tell. Ron biting the > dust will totally piss Harry off to give him the power and anger to > kill Voldemort. Hannah: I don't agree, because the 'power the Dark Lord knows not' is love. If Harry is angry and wants to murder Voldemort out of revenge, then I don't know if it can work. When Harry fights of LV at the end of OotP, it isn't anger and hatred at Sirius' death that saves him, it's the love he feels for Sirius and the thought of being able to go to his dead Godfather. When Harry tries to Crucio Bella it is out of rage and hatred for her having killed Sirius - and it doesn't work. Ever since POA, Harry's experiences with the Dementors have shown that happiness and positive thoughts are a better defence against evil than hatred and anger, which actually breed evil. Harry already has enough reasons to want to defeat LV. The death of Ron would be unnecessary. And for all JKR's dire (and publicity enhancing) warnings, I don't think for a minute that she will kill one of the trio. These books deal with tough issues, but they are still meant for children too (as young as eight, according to JKR), and they have a central optimism. Yes, people will die. But Ron, I think, will survive. Hannah From frugalarugala at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 14:51:07 2005 From: frugalarugala at yahoo.com (frugalarugala) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 14:51:07 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127062 Potioncat said: > I'm in the Good Slytherin camp. I think there's a good chance Theo > and Blaise will choose the DD side of the upcoming battle. I wouldn't > be surprised if some of the "good" adults turn out to be Slytherin > too. I'm hoping for that, too. And I think we're seen the start of it with Phineas Nigelus. Shall we devolve into speculation about which "good" adults might have come out Slytherin? My money's on Tonks: there's a degree of sneakiness involved in being a metamorphmagi, she's very young to be an auror which suggests ambition, and Harry really likes her. --Frugala From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 4 14:58:24 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 14:58:24 -0000 Subject: Imposter Moody's Motives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127063 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "finwitch" wrote: > > Juliane: snip > > I am re-reading Goblet of Fire and just finished the bit about the > > Unforgivable Curses. Why would imposter Moody want to make sure > > Hogwarts students know all about these? Why would he be > > advising "Constant Vigilance!" if he is actually a Death Eater? What > > were his true motives? snip > Finwitch: > > As I see it: > > 1) Keep up his cover. Remember, he managed to fool Albus Dumbledore, > who was friends with real Alastor Moody. The children DO speak of his > classes, all the time - (Fred&George calling it cool). Albus may have > been watching invisibly occasionally (which the imposter would know > via the magic eye - but Harry would have no idea, and thus we > wouldn't). And of course, the rule of successfully keeping cover is to > KEEP the cover even when you think no one is watching! > > 2) he's an addict on torturing... (or something. Crouch Jr. apparently > cannot stop once he starts, unless stopped) > > Finwitch imamommy: I would add to Finwitch's comments that I think Crouch Jr. has an obsession with the imperious curse, in particular. He was controlled by it for so long, he is fascinated by it, as well as the other curses. I think that is why, when Harry shows signs of being able to resist the curse, he prompts him to really work at it. In spite of himself, he is fascinated with Harry 's strength of character to be able to do right away what he could not do for so long. Most of his other actions can be ascribed to his hate for less devoted DE's--turning Draco into a ferret because his father had wormed his way out of Azkaban and then pretended he had never been a DE and antagonizing Snape, for example--or to setting up the "master plan." imamommy From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 16:15:09 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 09:15:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050404161510.20332.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127064 --- frugalarugala wrote: > My money's on Tonks: there's a degree of sneakiness involved in > being > a metamorphmagi, she's very young to be an auror which suggests > ambition, and Harry really likes her. And she was rather vague about why she wasn't a prefect: her "head of house" said she lacked certain qualities including the ability to behave herself. Might have been McGonagall but could be Snape. If it was McG, why not mention it to Harry? Magda __________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest From cat_kind at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 16:28:00 2005 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 16:28:00 -0000 Subject: OT: Re Hans In-Reply-To: <20050401221200.63202.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127065 catkind: I apologise to other members for replying off topic on this subject again. I'm still trying to find the logical basis to the discussion about Harry Potter and Rosicrucianism. Hans: I absolutely don't want to get into an arguing mode, i.e. trying to convince or persuade people. Hans: It is precisely by saying what things symbolise BEFORE Jo makes it obvious, that I can prove that what I'm saying is true. That?s not persuading people, that?s proving that I really know what I?m talking about. catkind: This seems to me to be an inconsistent position. If we are supposed to accept the next books as proof that your position is true (i.e. that HP is based on the Path of Liberation), is it not fair to expect that if the next books do not fit your predictions, you should consider it proved false? Be honest, is there anything Rowling could say or write that would make you change your mind? (Note I say could, not will; obviously you are firmly convinced that she will remain consistent to your theories.) I don't understand why you're posting your theories in a discussion forum if you don't want to discuss them. Hans: This is why I predicted in April 2003 what was coming in future books, and I was very happy to see many of my predictions verified even as early as book 5. catkind: Message number? Hans: You seem to like tables... catkind: I like concision. Tables are good from that point of view:-) Hans: I would ask you earnestly to accept that it's important not to drag holy things down into the muck by exposing them to ridicule. catkind: I wouldn't dream of ridiculing anybody's religious beliefs. Do you feel I am doing so? As I understand it we are not discussing the truth or otherwise of your religious beliefs but whether or not HP is an allegory of them. I don't see how we can discuss that without my trying to ascertain what it is exactly that you believe, but if I have said anything you consider to be derogatory or ridiculing of those beliefs I assure you it was out of ignorance and not intent. Hans in Message #125555: I just want to expose people to the truth: not the truth of the teachings themselves, but the truth of whether Harry Potter is BASED on those teachings. Reject the teachings of liberation by all means, call them heretical, satanic or occult or whatever you like. That's not the point. The point is: does Harry Potter contain them or not? Quite simple. Hans: I recognise Harry Potter as presenting this process [ck: liberation] in a veiled form, and so it's obviously extremely probable that the chakras will be symbolised somehow. In fact it?s quite unlikely they're NOT symbolised in Harry Potter, as their reversal is essential to the basic transmutation process. catkind: I previously understood that you were trying to *demonstrate* that HP is symbolic of the Path of Liberation. You seem to be saying here that you are taking this as given. Certainly I'd find the former discussion more interesting. --- Thanks for the references, Hans. I'm not commenting further on Weasleys at the moment because my local library seems to have mystically mislaid its copy of Leadbeater. Maybe later... catkind From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Mon Apr 4 17:56:12 2005 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 10:56:12 -0700 Subject: "Moral Politics" in the books (was: [HPforGrownups] Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1064749660.20050404105612@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127066 Here's my take on the purported "Moral Ambiguity" in the books... In his book, _Moral Politics_, cognitive linguist George Lakoff discusses two major moral worldviews which he refers to as "Strict Father" and "Nurturing Parent". In the "Strict Father" worldview, there is an absolute right and an absolute wrong. -- We are each of us either a "good person" or a "bad person", with no shades of grey. Children are assumed to be born "bad" (i.e. they want to do what "feels good" not what's right) and they have to be taught right from wrong. Lakeoff writes, "What is required of the child is OBEDIENCE [emphasis mine], because the Strict Father is a moral authority who knows right from wrong." "Rule-breaking" is a form of disobedience, becuase it is a defiance of moral authorities. The "Strict Father" is the sumpreme arbiter of morals, and therefore to disobey authority, however seemingly justified, is immoral, by definition. Lakeoff continues, "It is further assumed that the only way to teach kids obedience -- that is, right from wrong -- is through punishment, PAINFUL PUNISHMENT [again, emphasis mine], when they do wrong." So when a child does wrong he should be punished with pain, in order to "make an impression" on him of how immoral he has acted. In contrast, the "Nurturing Parent" model assumes that children (and the world as a whole) is basically good, though can certainly be made better. Children are to treated with compassion and empathy and to be taught to exhibit compassion and empathy to others. You need to be a friend to your child, building a relationship of mutual trust, honesty, and open communication. The "Nurturing Parent" teaches by example -- He or she is kind and compassionate to the child, so that the child will learn to be kind and compassionate to others -- especially the weak and disadvantaged who should be protected rather than bullied. The overall "Nurturing Parent" view of how the world should be and how we as human beings should treat each other is one of partnership, not hierarchal domination. In his thesis Lakoff is talking about these two models in the context of American Politics, but since reading it I see how it can be applied to other things, such as attutides about a very popular children's book series. I believe that Jo Rowling's outlook is by-and-large "Nurturing Parent". Her positive adult role-models -- Dumbledore, Sirius, the Weasleys, etc. -- are caring and compassionate people. They believe in love, kindness, generosity, and empathy. When they do enforce disipline, it is because they are concerned about Harry's safety (e.g. Lupin when Harry illegally sneaks into Hogsmeade), not because they insist on unwavering obedience, not "because I say so, that's why!". Jo's sympahthetic characters believe that "there's more important things -- friendship and bravery" than always blindly following authority, good or bad. Because Jo's POV is "Nurturing Parent", we can expect that she receives heavy criticism from "Strict Father" thinkers, whose rigid hierarchal view of the world causes them to equate morality with obedience to the established authority. These critics then zero in on examples of Harry's "disobedience", denouncing it as immoral, and discount his kind and heroic actions. Indeed, "Strict Father" thinkers are believers in a dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself world, in which we should *not* offer kindness to the weak and helpless. People who are disadvantaged (like the Weasleys, or House Elves) are inherently immoral, or else they would "pull themselves up by their bootstraps". So why should Harry help lazy slobs like them? -- He should be following a positive moral authority like the Malfoys, who are members of the "deserving rich", not that "champion of commoners... Albus Dumbledore". "Strict Father" thinkers, while critical of the Potterverse as a whole, do admire the "Strict Fathers" in the series -- the Dursleys, Snape, Filch, Umbridge -- because they insist on asserting their moral authority, and even *punish* Harry. To them, this is completely right and natural, because in "Strict Father" thinking, everything is white or black, either you're moral or not, and those who defy authority are *always* immoral, and therefore should be punished. In this POV Harry *IS* "just a nasty little boy who thinks rules are beneath him"! And one who time and again, "gets away" with his "immoral" rule-breaking, which is perceived as sending a negative, morally ambiguous message to our kids. I could go on, but I think I've made the main point. Feel free to offer your own thoughts/feedback. -- Dave From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Mon Apr 4 18:04:41 2005 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 11:04:41 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] My God, You Took an AK for Me! In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <183750212.20050404110441@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127067 Monday, April 4, 2005, 12:41:19 AM, Someone wrote: S> What exactly would happen were this rather S> fanciful scenario to be played out with AK curses rather then bullets? I think Fawkes' actions in the MoM (OOP, Ch. 36) in which he "takes an AK" for Dumbledore answers this question. I think Fawkes would have died were he anything other than a phoenix. I think this scene may even be foreshadowing... Only it will be a human protector next time... -- Dave From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 18:31:57 2005 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (xcpublishing) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 18:31:57 -0000 Subject: Snape and Raistlin Majere Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127068 phoenixgod2000 writes: >I never saw Raistlin as either whiny or petty. And I agree that >Caramon *could* be annoying. But what HP really needs is a character >like Tasselhoff... ***Now that I think about it, I pretty much didn't like any of the characters in that series! And I was playing D&D at the time, which is why I read it - we played the module, which was actually a blast. They were either too good, or too evil, or too annoying... just too something! The only D&D books I really liked were R.A. Salvatore's. >Dobby almost qualifies but not quite. ***I'm pretty astonished that I actually like Dobby. He's way more annoying in the movies than the books. >Then you are a kinder person than I and have far more faith in DD's >judgement. How many times has he been hoodwinked again? About three >times a book it seems like. I'm with Ron, Snape is always going to >be on my crap list. ***Actually, I'm putting all my faith in JKR's ability to come up with some sort of logical explanation for the fact that DD seems to be screwing up big time. I'm hoping the explanation involves some sort of evil, but that's pretty farfetched. Maybe he's just senile! >I could never get into that series. I didn't like the authors >writing style. (Donaldson) But I was also a lot younger when I picked the book >so maybe I'll try it again. Once I read the nine dozen books that >are already on my list. ***Don't bother. It was a grueling chore to get to that last book. I spent the first eight books hoping something horrible would climb up and eat the main character. >No, he only makes fun of little girls and the bullied. He's a >sweetheart. There is nothing to admire about Severus Snape. ***Point taken. I hope Snape remains firmly in the camp of evil. >It's still good to hear from you, even though we disagree :) I was >wondering what you would like about my post since I know we've read >a lot of the same books. ***Ditto! It's fun to go back to those old books now and then. In fact, since last I emailed you, I've been dying to dig up The Black Company. (I gave all my copies away.) I'm reading the second book of the Coldfire Trilogy by C. S. Friedman - Voldemort could take some lessons from Gerald Tarrant. Nicky Joe From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Apr 4 18:37:33 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 18:37:33 -0000 Subject: Full HBP cover artwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127069 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mfterman" wrote: > > Now logically, unless we're recreating a specific scene from the book, > we'd expect the most significant characters of the book to appear on > the cover along with Harry. The most significant five characters as of > the end of book five, besides Harry and Dumbledore are Ron, Hermione, > Ginny, Neville and Luna, in approximately that order. Hickengruendler: Well, I would say Hagrid, Snape or Voldemort are pretty significant, too. As are a few others, but I won't arguing with you, since I agree with your basical point that Ginny certainly is important enough to be on the backcover. In OotP even Tonks was on the backcover, and she's much less important than Ginny. > > The simplest and best fit is Ron and Hermione on one side > and Ginny on the other. I agree, but... > > > > In short, I think a lot of people are trying to read too much into > this. This is just showing some of Harry's closest friends, his inner > circle, and the simplest and cleanest fit without any elaborate > explanation is that it happens to be those three. Sometimes a cigar is > just a cigar, and in this case I don't think there's any mystery or > surprise here. Some people may want there to be one, but in this case > I think there's less here than meets the eye. Hickengruendler: This contradicts every Mary Grand Pr? Cover art. So far she never has drown just a few characters, but always a scene. I think on this poster are two scenes, one with Harry and Dumbledore (which will be on the cover on the book) and the other one, with Ron, Hermione, inny (and probably a few characters hidden behind the pilar thing on the poster) looking at the Dark Mark. Hickengruendler > > mfterman From feenyjam at msu.edu Mon Apr 4 15:32:18 2005 From: feenyjam at msu.edu (greenfirespike) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 15:32:18 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127070 I believe that a character's Patronus will take the same shape as her/his Animagus. While we no conclusive evidence via canon, because we have only been privy to either a character's Patronus or Animagus, it appears they derive from the same internal thing. Look for example at Jo's comments made on March 4, 2004; when asked if a person can choose what animal you become when you turn into an Animagus, Rowling replied "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." This implies a character's Animagus reflects her/his personality in some fashion, the animal spirit of that particular character. Although we have no official formula or theory as to how a character's Patronus is formed, all examples show that it also takes the form of an animal. We know that a character cannot chose what animal their Animagus is, and nothing suggests that a character may select what animal/shape/object her/his Patronus undertakes, thusly I suggest that a character will have the same animal as both her/his Patronus and Animagus. Respectfully, Greenfirespike From kb1195 at hotmail.com Mon Apr 4 18:17:11 2005 From: kb1195 at hotmail.com (katevldz) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 18:17:11 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127071 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > >>Bonnie: > > >In chapter 21 of POA: > >" 'You surely don't believe a word of Black's story?' Snape > whispered, his eyes fixed on Dumbledore's face. > >.......'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of > sixteen,' he breathed. 'You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You > haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' " > > > Betsy: > Because Sirius tried to *kill* Snape? I just have a question, really, (not just to Betsy, to anyone who wants to jump in). And I am not trying to be snarky, I am really curious. Often times on this list, when reference is made to Sirius relaying some fact about Voldy War I and its aftermath, or something about Snape, or the Death Eaters or really anything for that matter, a popular rebuttable here is that Sirius has issues and is therefore not to be taken at face value. He spent so much time in Azkaban, he must be unstable, or he hated Snape, was a bully in his youth, was mean and snarky, has ulterior motives, so on and so forth. What I don't understand is why some people are so quick to believe Snape is putting forth accurate information in the above scene. I think we can agree that Snape has his issues too. Snape is absolutely furious in this scene, perhaps not really thinking clearly. It seems that we should be taking Snape's angry words with the same grain of salt with which people regard Sirius, in order to be fair about it. So, if someone could please explain to me why they do believe Snape in this scene, that Sirius indeed meant to actually *kill* him, I'd be really interested. thanks and best regards, Kate From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Apr 4 19:01:18 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:01:18 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) Message-ID: <21724379.1112641279279.JavaMail.root@waldorf.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127072 I just have a question, really, (not just to Betsy, to anyone who wants to jump in). And I am not trying to be snarky, I am really curious. Often times on this list, when reference is made to Sirius relaying some fact about Voldy War I and its aftermath, or something about Snape, or the Death Eaters or really anything for that matter, a popular rebuttable here is that Sirius has issues and is therefore not to be taken at face value. He spent so much time in Azkaban, he must be unstable, or he hated Snape, was a bully in his youth, was mean and snarky, has ulterior motives, so on and so forth. What I don't understand is why some people are so quick to believe Snape is putting forth accurate information in the above scene. I think we can agree that Snape has his issues too. Snape is absolutely furious in this scene, perhaps not really thinking clearly. It seems that we should be taking Snape's angry words with the same grain of salt with which people regard Sirius, in order to be fair about it. So, if someone could please explain to me why they do believe Snape in this scene, that Sirius indeed meant to actually *kill* him, I'd be really interested. thanks and best regards, Kate Sherry now, adding: And while we are on that, I'm always curious why people consider sirius so terrible, refer to the fact that in OOTP he still hates Snape, hasn't matured, etc, etc. and yet, Snape hates Harry for the mere reason that Harry's father was James. how adult and mature and putting the past behind you is that? I freely admit that I like the character of sirius for his loyalty and bravery, and I can forgive the behavior of a teenage boy, especially when I think we don't have all the details on that subject yet. I also like the character of snape, because he is complex and has some deep issues, it seems. but I think that holding a grudge against a child because you hated his father is one of the most immature and ridiculous things possible. So, how is Snape any better than Sirius? very curious, sherry 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 rmatovic at ssk.com Mon Apr 4 19:31:49 2005 From: rmatovic at ssk.com (Rebecca M) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 19:31:49 -0000 Subject: My God, You Took an AK for Me! In-Reply-To: <183750212.20050404110441@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127073 Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > I think Fawkes' actions in the MoM (OOP, Ch. 36) in which he "takes an > AK" for Dumbledore answers this question. I think Fawkes would have > died were he anything other than a phoenix. Minor correction --Fawkes DID die, but because he was a phoenix, he was resurrected as a hatchling immediately after his death. Rebecca From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 20:00:51 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 13:00:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050404200051.68374.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127074 --- katevldz wrote: > > What I don't understand is why some people are so quick to believe > Snape is putting forth > accurate information in the above scene. I think we can agree that > Snape has his issues > too. Snape is absolutely furious in this scene, perhaps not really > thinking clearly. It seems > that we should be taking Snape's angry words with the same grain of > salt with which > people regard Sirius, in order to be fair about it. > Well, I think you answered your own question. Snape is so emotionally distraught that whether or not Sirius did intend to kill him through the Prank (and while I think Sirius is an idiot I don't think he was trying to kill Snape deliberately), there's no doubt that Snape sincerely believes that Sirius did. Sirius' comments about, for instance, James disliking Snape because Snape was into the Dark Arts and James always hated the DA make me suspicious because Sirius also says that James and Snape hated each other on sight and Lupin says that Snape was jealous of James' popularity and Quidditch skills. So my question to them would be: which is it, guys? And why doesn't Lupin back up Sirius' claim about James disliking DA!loving Snape? Also Sirius is maddeningly imprecise about dates and timing when he talks about the past. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 4 20:12:55 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:12:55 -0000 Subject: OT: Re Hans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127075 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: > > catkind: I apologise to other members for replying off topic on this > subject again. I'm still trying to find the logical basis to the > discussion about Harry Potter and Rosicrucianism. Hans in Message #125555: > I just want to expose people to the truth: > not the truth of the teachings themselves, but the truth of whether > Harry Potter is BASED on those teachings. Reject the teachings of > liberation by all means, call them heretical, satanic or occult or > whatever you like. That's not the point. The point is: does Harry > Potter contain them or not? Quite simple. > > Hans: I recognise Harry Potter as presenting this process [ck: > liberation] in a veiled form, and so it's obviously extremely probable > that the chakras will be symbolised somehow. In fact it?s quite > unlikely they're NOT symbolised in Harry Potter, as their reversal is > essential to the basic transmutation > process. Geoff: This brings me back to a point I have made previously. I have frequently referred to CS Lewis, JRR Tolkien and JK Rowling as bringing Christian ideas covertly into their books - although Lewis was less covert than the other two. There is sufficient evidence in these authors to pick out themes and comments made by characters to underline that these observations are coming from a Christian direction. A number of authors have written books connecting Christian ideas with views expressed in the HP books. If, however, Hans is correct and JKR is writing Harry Potter as a covert example of the path of liberation, what is the point of veiling it so much that the association of ideas will only be made by a very few people - that readers will totally miss the analogies? This brings us back to the exchange we had some time ago when I bojected to the suggestion that the way to heaven is only through special knowledge - thus impliying an elitist approach - as opposed to the Christian message which offers a simple way to those who can just believe the very basic message of the Gospel. Christ died, Christ rose, Christ will come again. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 20:19:26 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:19:26 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127076 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abadgerfan2" wrote: > > I recently read a crtique of the "Potter" books that caused me to > briefly question... > > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience > to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you > best." ... is do we want to teach our youngsters such values? > > > Your views????? bboyminn: Other have already made the key point which is that rules and law are not the same as morality. That which is immoral is not necessarily against the law, and that which is accepted by law/rules is not necessarily moral. Law and morality, while related, are not one and the same. So, morality is not measured by adherence to rules and law, but by conscience, and a genuine sense of right and wrong. While Law and Morality, while related, are not one and the same. On a long list of history's most honored people, among them Jesus, Ghandi, and others, you will find a list dominated by people who chose to live and die for Moral right, independant of or strongly in opposition to legal and bureaucratic /right/. Further, those who live with ridged adherence to rules/law are not making moral choices, they are in fact, abdicating all moral responsibility. By blindly adhering to the rules, they can comfortable go their whole lives without every having to morally challenge themselves, without ever having to consult their conscience, without ever having to make the horrible choice between what is truly right and what is truly wrong. It's the easy path, that why it is the least morally developed path. Two key points- -Kids are not stupid. -The lesson, especially the life lessons, were learn best are the lessons we teach ourselves. - - corollary: Revelation is a greater teacher than explanation. Kids are not stupid, they see moral ambiguity every day of their lives. They see the school bully who is ignored and sometimes even supported by the students and school administration because he/she is rich, popular, and a jock. What kind of example does that set for kids? How does that establish and re-enforce good moral character? In the Harry Potter books we see rule/law ambiguity, but I think these books allow kids to realize for themselves that which is unjust and morally wrong. Moral truth and moral right are revealed to them, and that revelation comes from within; that makes in the most powerful moral lesson. Further, the book show the readers that regardless of the struggle and risk, the right thing to do is fight for justice and moral truth. Aren't these the things you REALLY want you kids to learn? Would you prefer that your kids internally developed a true sense of right and wrong, or blindly followed the established bureaucracy like sheep to the slaughter? I think the Harry Potter books can and do help kids and adults come to an better internal revelation of right and wrong. They develop a sense of justice and injustice, and can be motivated to have the courage to stand up and take action in support of true moral right. Courage, justice, right, truth, conscience aren't these the true foundation of morality? I can't imagine that a parent could want more for the moral development of their kids or for themselves. Just adding my thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From xcpublishing at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 20:26:55 2005 From: xcpublishing at yahoo.com (xcpublishing) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:26:55 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127077 Emma Hawkes wrote: >Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only >child? This one seemed obvious to me. Two self-centered people like Lucius and Narcissa do not have the time nor the patience to devote to more than one child. Imagine Draco as a baby! All that crying and fussing and the messes! Even with servants and nannies, it's far too difficult. I can just picture Lucius and Narcissa, lying in bed at 2 a.m. with Draco screaming down the hall in his nursery. "Is she going to get up and silence that caterwauling? I must search for a new nanny tomorrow. This one simply cannot deal with the child. How are we supposed to sleep?" Going through the infant stage once is bad enough - why on earth would they willingly do it again? They have their heir, thank goodness! Nicky Joe From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 20:29:53 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:29:53 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <20050404200051.68374.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127078 Magda: Sirius' comments about, for instance, James disliking Snape because Snape was into the Dark Arts and James always hated the DA make me suspicious because Sirius also says that James and Snape hated each other on sight and Lupin says that Snape was jealous of James' popularity and Quidditch skills. So my question to them would be: which is it, guys? Alla: Erm, both? I don't see the contradiction, honestly. Suppose James indeed always hated DA AND he knew Snape or his family before they started Hogwarts. So, the moment James sees Snape, he hates him as representative of Dark Arts family? I also think that jealousy as to Quidditcjh could pe a part of the equation, why not? Again, the bottom line - I don't see the contradiction here. Maybe I misunderstood you? Magda: And why doesn't Lupin back up Sirius' claim about James disliking DA!loving Snape? Alla: Because Sirius already said it and Remus did not want to be a parrot? :) Seriously, I am not sure why JKR needed two of them to repeat the same info. Just my opinion of course, Alla From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 21:00:46 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:00:46 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin - LINKS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Noj_Ivob" wrote: > > > I have seen many people refer to a quote from JKR regarding a "good" > Slytherin, so I was wondering if somebody provide the exact quote > ... edited... Thanks in advance. > > -Dan bboyminn: I can't quote JKR, but I can quote us. 'Good Slytherin' is a concept, or theory, developed by the group. In it's simplest form it simply says that the idea that all Slytherins are evil is ridiculous. Then extending that speculates relative to the uniting of the House, we beleive we will see one or more Slytherins fighting on the side of what we see as Good, perhaps even becoming friends, or at least, friendly with Harry & Co. I personally feel the Good Slytherin/Bad Slytherin themes will play out in the continuation of the DA Club. LINKS- Date: Thu Mar 18, 2004 3:48 pm Subject: Switching houses http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/93350 Indirectly touches on the 'Good Slytherin' subject. Date: Fri Feb 20, 2004 8:00 am Subject: The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/91320 Nice long thread that touches on several aspects of the latest book including the Good Slytherin. Date: Fri Nov 14, 2003 1:43 am Subject: Re: The Good Slytherin - Stringy & Weedy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84984 Discusses who likely candidate are for the Good Slytherin. Subject line refers to the books describing one Slytherin as 'weedy' and another one as 'stringy'. Date: Thu Nov 13, 2003 1:22 am Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84899 Discussion of whether Harry said he want to be Gryffindor or if he simply said 'not Slytherin'. Additional thought on the Good Slytherin. Started with a discussion of the Sorting Hat and how it works. Date: Wed Jul 16, 2003 10:27 pm Subject: Thestrals and Slytherins http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/71039 Starts as a discussion of the 'stringy' Slytherin who could see the Thestral and quickly switches to this title "Good Slytherin (Was: Re: Thestrals and Slytherins)". That should help bring you up to speed on the 'Good Slytherin'. Steve/bboyminn From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 21:16:53 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:16:53 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127080 >>Dan: >I have seen many people refer to a quote from JKR regarding a "good" Slytherin, so I was wondering if somebody provide the exact quote. I have searched for this quote for quite some time and I have yet to find anything. I don't want to not believe Jo said this, but I would feel much better if I was able to see the quote myself (or at least know what interview/chat session it came from). Thanks in advance.< Betsy: I second Potioncat that the "good Slytherin" is based on theory, not an interview. I believe the original source of that theory (or at least a very strong support for it) is the Sorting Hat's song in OotP, especially the end. "Though condemned I am to split you Still I worry that it's wrong, Though I must fulfill my duty And must quarter every year Still I wonder whether sorting May not bring the end I fear. Oh, know the perils, read the signs, The warning history shows, For our Hogwarts is in danger >From external, deadly foes And we must unite inside her Or we'll crumble from within I have told you, I have warned you... Let the Sorting now begin." (OotP hardback Scholastic ed. pp. 206-7) The song is heavy foreshadowing in and of itself, but then we have this from Harry, further on: " 'And it wants all the Houses to be friends?' said Harry, looking over at the Slytherin table, where Draco Malfoy was holding court. 'Fat chance.' " (ibid p. 209) And if that doesn't smack of "famous last words" I don't know what does. *g* We've already been introduced to a Hufflepuff champion with Cedric Diggory, and with Luna Lovegood, we meet a Ravenclaw champion. (Interesting that both characters completely break the stereotype of their houses.) We also get further fleshing out of other Ravenclaws and Hufflepuff students. Slytherins are notably absent, and the Slytherin stereotype goes unquestioned. The song also specifically mentions the strong friendship between Gryffindor and Slytherin, before "discord crept amoung [them]" (ibid p. 205). All of this seems like fairly strong foreshadowing that Harry must join forces with a Slytherin to succeed in defeating Voldemort. I think the "good Slytherin" theory is pretty widely accepted. The big discussion is usually on who the Slytherin will be. Betsy, who has her fingers crossed! =) From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Mon Apr 4 21:38:56 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:38:56 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127081 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Emma Hawkes wrote: > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only child? My own take on it is essentially historical: the Malfoys act in all respects as a classical family of nobility. For a noble family, the only three reasons to marry were titles, land and money (two out of three for best results :D ). Now, it is obvious that Malfoys aren't aiming for titles (that is, the only distinction they seem to want is that of pureblood, more on that later), nor are they hurting for money (clearly stablished in many places, particularly in the first couple of books, as well as in the frequent bribes used to remain in good standing). So the most logical aim must be lands, at this point. Having two (or more) children is a fundamental mistake when you're aiming for lands, because you usually need to divide family lands in two (even more so in the wizarding world, where you can't just pack the second child away into the church). If this is what they are thinking, a single child who they can arrange marriage to another landlord would further concentrate power into the family, while several children would force to divide it into several branches, with a subsequent loss of land for each branch. Now, I mention titles above. We know that there are titles in the WW - Merlin order, diverse academical achivements, etc etc., but so far we have failed to be impressed by hereditary titles, equivalent to our barons, counts and so on. There is a concept of family line, but the only point in favour of one or another is their relative purity, as it is well known. This, however, just limits the objectives, but it doesn't nullify them. It is clear that pure wizard families take extreme pains to ensure that they remain pure, which in turn means creating an equivalent to titles, which in this case they're just surnames. But Malfoys are already a top wizarding family, so it is hard to imagine who they could marry to increase their own sense of importance. This is why I discarded "titles" as a reason for having children. > * His parents are too inbred to produce more children. (Consider how > similar their nordic looks are.) While imbreeding might very well be a problem (which has been mentioned several times, as a matter of fact), there is no real reason to think this might be the case, IMO. Inbreeding usually results in what children they have also presenting recessive traits and while Malfoy is a disgusting little ferret, he seems physically sound. Granted, it is difficult to tell due to the advanced medical magics that the WW has access to. > * His parents are trapped in a loveless marriage. (Arranged > marriages would fit with the bloodlines obsession.) Most marriages over the ages have been arranged, and thus you have to assume "loveless" (although I've often heard that the idea of "marriage for love" is a quite recent adition to our culture). This hasn't, at any rate, stopped most societies from continuing. Malfoy Sr. doesn't seem to be one to shy away from what he perceives to be his duty towards his own status, so I would discount that lack of love would stop him from fathering children, if he thought that it was his duty to do so. Even if he has to resort to Magical Viagra (engorgement charms?). > * His parents chose not to have more children. (Draco, like the > others in his year, was conceived and born almost at the height of > the last war. Perhaps fewer people chose to have children at that > point? That would explain why there seem to be more students in the > school overall than can be accounted for by multiplying the number of > kids in Harry's year.) There was this old theory that said that the aligment of DE children in a small amount of time answered to a dark purpose. While nothing much ever came out of it, that I remember, it cannot be discarded. Malfoy, Crabb, Goyle and others all had children around the same time. Since I've already been repulsive by suggesting Viagra in the post, I might as well go all the way and suggest that, for example, one of the spells for eternal life that Voldemort was toying with involved serial possesion of bodies - in which case, most DEs would prefer to posses someone of their own line rather than using some lesser blooded individual. Since it also had to be younger (not much point in possesing someone with less life left than you had), most might have decided to have children the moment the spell was discovered - but had to be abandoned as an idea after Voldemort went vapour. It might still be in the works, though*. > * He has siblings who are much older than him or much younger, so > Harry has not yet noticed them. All the Malfoys have attended Slytherin (we have been told), so I have to disagree with Eggplant there. Al older brother wouldn't be left out of the World Cup, either. But maybe a baby brother that was left with the nanny? Of course, this is reusable: except in the three months following the Cup, Draco could have had a baby borther at any time and we would have no reason to be informed - unless Malfoy gloats about it to Harry, and it would be rather OoC. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf, trying out posting in a web browser that has given him problems in the past, so please excuse him if the lines are all weird *For those cheering for a Draco Redemption, the fact that his daddy only wants him to use his body as a step in eternal life might be a reason for him to do a Snape and join the good guys. From jaanise at hello.lv Mon Apr 4 13:16:45 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 16:16:45 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Stubbornness In-Reply-To: <149.429d3613.2f820376@aol.com> Message-ID: <000001c53918$8ef8de40$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 127082 Bonnie: > > I don't trust Snape for one minute. His stubbornness and meanness to > the students, Harry in particular is inexcuseable. Someone so mean > minded cannot to my mind be a "good guy". I don't know why DD trusts > Snape. JKR, I hope, will come up with something believable; but I > think it's a very long shot. Julie: Even though Sirius knows Snape is on the side of good (we're assuming), he doesn't let up on Snape either. The two just hate each other. It happens, even between otherwise "good" people. Jaanis: I wanted to add that Snape *is not* a "good guy", and if I'm not mistaken, Rowling has stressed this in a few interviews. Maybe you can put the phrase in quotes meaning that he is with the OotP and against DEs and Voldemort, but he is not a *good* guy. As isn't Umbridge even when she's against Voldemort, too. From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Apr 4 21:49:59 2005 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 17:49:59 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why is Draco an only child? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127083 In a message dated 4/4/2005 5:41:59 PM Eastern Daylight Time, grey.wolf.c at gmail.com writes: while several children would force to divide it into several branches, with a subsequent loss of land for each branch. ========== Sherrie here: Unless, of course, the WW practices primogeniture, in which the eldest son gets everything, and the younger children get zippo. (Think of "Sense & Sensibility", e.g.) We don't really know what inheritance laws/patterns obtain in the WW - we've really never seen anyone inherit. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Mon Apr 4 22:01:35 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:01:35 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127084 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greenfirespike" wrote: > > This implies a character's Animagus reflects her/his personality in > some fashion, the animal spirit of that particular character. > Although we have no official formula or theory as to how a > character's Patronus is formed, all examples show that it also takes > the form of an animal. > > We know that a character cannot chose what animal their Animagus is, > and nothing suggests that a character may select what > animal/shape/object her/his Patronus undertakes, thusly I suggest > that a character will have the same animal as both her/his Patronus > and Animagus. > > Respectfully, > > Greenfirespike The only thing we know for certain about patronus is that Harry's a stag - or is it? In fact, we know something else, that the stag is his father's animagus form. Now, when I was thinking about your theory, something was discordant. Harry is *not* a stag - while his father, from what we can deduce from Snape's memories, was very much the kind of jock you get in American teenager movies (particularly at the time he undertook his first animagus transformation, back in fifth year when, IIRC, the memories were happening), and which I can associte perfectly with the stag as an animal - proud, strong, head up high, etc.* This actually suggests to me that the Patronus is not your animagus form, but the animagus form of the person who you "conjure" to serve as your protector (patronus means, I think, protector). And a protector it is indeed. Why did Harry get his father? The most obvious answer is that we all tend to rely in our parents for protection from a very early age, and that does leave an imprint. Such things in the WW are usually even more strongly linked - and we know that Harry's parents died protecting him, and he knows that too, very well. Really, the choice is reduced to two - James and Lily. Why James? Maybe Lily's animagus form was/would have been a dove or something equally cute but hardly what Harry would expect to be protected by :D In short, I think that while the animagus form reflects your own spirit, the form of the patronus reflect the spirit of who you call to protect you - and Harry, in particular, calls upon his father. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf, who has hopefully managed to format this message so it looks ok in web view *So what would Harry's animagus form actually be? A lion, maybe? Harry can be described as calm and self-effacing except when push comes to shove, when he becomes a tremendous fighter. Now, I just have to try and match that to an animal... From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 22:06:40 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:06:40 -0000 Subject: Harry self-effacing? (Was: Potter and Peanuts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127085 >>Betsy: >Actually, I think if Harry had been a bit more self-effacing when he and Snape first meet in Potions class in PS/SS, their relationship might have gotten off to a much better start.< >>Geoff: >More self-effacing? >What's the guy supposed to do? Lie on the floor and let Snape wipe his feet on him?< Betsy: Well... yeah. At least from Snape's point of view. In that first scene in PS/SS I believe Snape is trying to accomplish several things. He's establishing himself as a good little Harry-Potter- hating Death Eater, letting the class know that he is not a professor to be taken lightly, demonstrating that he expects students to dive deeply into their studies if they hope to do well in his class, and establishing his dominance over James Potter's son. I don't think Snape's introduction to the world of potions is new. I think he gives the same spiel, complete with robe twirling, to every first year class. I'll bet though, that he spreads his impossible questions around. (None of the older students speak of Snape picking out a scapegoat, anyway.) In this case he spends his spleen on Harry alone. As I said, I think Snape does this for a variety of reasons, but one of them is definitely (though possibly subconsciously) a question of dominance. And he very much wants Harry to show his belly. I think the reason Snape wants this is that James pretty much dominated Snape throughout their school years; the pensieve scene in OotP was one of pure dominance. The only way James could have further proved his point was to out and out rape Snape. Snape was shown to have few friends, and Sirius' poke about Snape being Lucius' lapdog suggests that Snape turned to older housemates for protection, among other things. I do think Snape got his own back. The fact that James and Sirius felt they needed to take on Snape together suggests he was usually formidable in one-on-one clashes. But James had a second in Sirius. There's no suggestion that Snape had a similar friend of his own. So I think Snape generally got the bad end of that particular war. The fact that Harry so resembles his father was a major point against him in Snape's eyes. And I wonder if Snape was trying to prove something to himself when he first takes Harry on. I also wonder if their relationship might have been less adversarial if Harry had completely yielded. *BUT*, I also recognize that it would have been impossible for Harry to yield. His personality precludes such submission. Which is a good thing; the challenges Harry has faced and will face demands a certain self-assurance. And JKR makes the strength of Harry's character plain to the reader in the first scenes with Harry and the Dursleys. The Dursleys are constantly demanding that Harry yield, that he buy into their definition of him, and Harry, politely, cleverly, and sometimes silently, refuses to do so. This quiet strength is one of the things I love about Harry. So while I recognize what Snape was asking of Harry, I also recognize that Harry could never give in to Snape as much as Snape demanded. I'm glad the scene played out the way it did. I don't think Harry should have answered any differently. But I can see how Harry's quiet defiance did nothing to settle Snape's fears of like father like son. (Though honestly, I think Harry has much more in common with Snape than James as far as personalities go, and I hope Snape recognized that fact through the Occlumency lessons. We shall see.) If Harry *had* been a Charlie Brown, I think Snape would have been satisfied. The readers, however, would not have been. Betsy, who fully recognizes the circular nature of her statements but can totally live with it. *g* From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 19:15:34 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 12:15:34 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050404191534.85278.qmail@web30702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127086 > Sherry wrote: > I'm always curious why people consider Sirius so > terrible, refer to the fact that in OOTP he still > hates Snape, hasn't matured, etc, etc. and yet, > Snape hates Harry for the mere reason that Harry's > father was James. How adult and mature and putting > the past behind you is that? I think that > holding a grudge against a child because you hated > his father is one of the most immature and ridiculous > things possible. So, how is Snape any better than > Sirius? Sirius really isn't any better than Snape in that reference. But in my own small corner of the world I sorta think that Sirius has a reason for kinda not being totally mature emotionally--I mean he was all locked up in Azkaban for 12 years so it's not like he had time to do stuff like get a job, start a family and actually mature through responsiblity and dealing with the outside world. Besides I always took Azkaban to be kinda creepy and the sort of place to emotionally scar even the toughest person. So in my mind what is Snape's excuse. Not that I am justyfing how he is or the way he treats Harry, but at least Snape didn't have to deal with being tossed in a horrid place for something you didn't do... laurie From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Mon Apr 4 22:10:50 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:10:50 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127087 > Sherrie here: > > Unless, of course, the WW practices primogeniture, in which the eldest son > gets everything, and the younger children get zippo. (Think of "Sense & > Sensibility", e.g.) We don't really know what inheritance laws/patterns obtain in > the WW - we've really never seen anyone inherit. > > Sherrie > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Actually, those rules were almost always in place - the parents indeed could simply give all the lands and fortune to the eldest, and legally the rest of the children wouldn't be able to do a thing. However, Most noble families depend more heavily on honour and respect, even the malfoys, after a fashion. It would simply not look well to not arrange things for all the children - most would be married off, of course, but even those would get dowries, and the rest would be provided for. Or else the other families would mutter - and muttering is the one thing one family such as the Malfoys try to avoid, since it can eventually hurt them a lot. A usual motto in many proud lineages - even some of the most corrupt in our history, like the Borgia - is that, no matter what, you look after your own. So while legally they could have more children and not divide the family wealth, I rather doubt they would do it. It would only lead to a loss pf position for the family anyway. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From deatheaterjames at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 4 20:36:38 2005 From: deatheaterjames at yahoo.co.uk (deatheaterjames) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:36:38 -0000 Subject: My God, You Took an AK for Me! -- Fawkes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127088 Just a thought. If Fawkes died to save Dumbledore, does that mean Voldemort cannot kill Dumbledore because, like Harry, someone who loved him died for him? I can see so many holes in this. 1) Fawkes is a Phoenix, not a witch or wizard 2) Fawkes comes back to life - he's not in Voldemort's wand 3) Having Dumbledore impervious to Voldemort makes for a rather weak nemesis scenario. But I like the idea. "deatheaterjames" From mfterman at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 21:29:30 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:29:30 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127089 My own feeling is that book six is going to be the book where the whole "Slytherin = evil" bit hits the fan, and that will be the dominant theme of the book. Why do I think this way? Because of the political fallout of the exposure of Lucius Malfoy and cronies as Death Eaters. Remember that Seamus' mum didn't want him going to school with a loony like Potter? Imagine how she's going to be feeling about his going to school with the children of four known Death Eaters? Admittedly, they're all over in Slytherin, but she's going to have some very legitimate worries about her son's safety. So are a lot of students as well. I expect there to have been a storm of letters demanding the students be expelled, and even the Ministry will be tempted to get rid of them now, as a sign that they are taking constructive action. Dumbledore won't stand for it. Dumbledore will point out it is their parents who have been convicted, not them and believes in giving them a chance. Of course I suspect even Dumbledore doesn't expect them to mend their ways, but his own sense of honor and integrity will demand that he give them a chance to redeem themselves. This is probably going to widen the breach between Harry and Dumbledore as Harry himself will be all for the expulsion of these four. The whole issue of Slytherin is really going to polarize the school. There are going to be those who believe that all Slytherins are potential Death Eaters. Of course most of the Slytherins are going to put a great deal of distance between themselves and Malfoy and his cronies. Nor do I believe that all of the loyal children of Death Eaters are only to be found in Slytherin. But the vast majority of students are going to be seeing things that way. My own feeling is this is the book when the four Houses will learn to unite, and Harry is going to have to confront and overcome his prejudice against the Slytherins in order to do it. I don't think that Draco is going to redeem himself. On the other hand, I won't say that Pansy Parkinson, for example, won't switch her allegiances either. But I like to think after some trap aimed at Harry, the students of all four Houses who are in Voldemort's camp will be exposed and expelled, and the four Houses will truly be able to unite together. At least that's what I hope will happen. Ultimately this series is really a coming of age story about Harry. He's starting to grow up and start facing some of his prejudices. He's learned over the course of the last couple of books that the government isn't perfect, Dumbledore isn't perfect, and things don't always work out for the best. One of the major areas where Harry has some growing to do is in his prejudice against Slytherins, and I think that book six is the best time to do it, to ready him to face Voldemort in book seve. mfterman From kb1195 at hotmail.com Mon Apr 4 22:06:19 2005 From: kb1195 at hotmail.com (katevldz) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:06:19 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <20050404200051.68374.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127090 Magda: Well, I think you answered your own question. Snape is so emotionally distraught that whether or not Sirius did intend to kill him through the Prank (and while I think Sirius is an idiot I don't think he was trying to kill Snape deliberately), there's no doubt that Snape sincerely believes that Sirius did. I'm sorry, perhaps I am not being clear. I'm not asking if Snape sincerely believes that the correct interpretation of events is that Sirius intended to kill him. I definitely think Snape does wholeheartedly believe that was the intention. This reply upthread spurred my original question: > >>Bonnie: > >In chapter 21 of POA: > >" 'You surely don't believe a word of Black's story?' Snape > whispered, his eyes fixed on Dumbledore's face. > >.......'Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age of > sixteen,' he breathed. 'You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? You > haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?' " > > > Betsy: > Because Sirius tried to *kill* Snape? What I don't understand is why some readers readily accept Snape's interpretation of said event as being accurate and correct, with little to no corroboration of his story. I don't have my books at hand, so I may be forgetting something, but does anyone else corroborate Snape's story? I know DD responds to Snape in PoA that he remembers everything clearly (or something like that), but he never says Yes, I remember, he tried to kill you. And I think DD says in PS when talking to Harry that James saved Snape's life a long time ago. But just because James ended up saving Snape's life doesn't mean it translates to Sirius intended to kill Snape. IIRC (and please correct me if I'm wrong), we hear the story of The Prank from Snape who is angry with Harry at the time and is trying to cut James down in Harry's eyes. Is Snape's version of The Prank the only one we hear (again, don't have my books and can't remember, sorry!)? (I also just want to point out here that I am in no way defending Sirius' behavior in this situation. This is just something that bugs me.) So what I am asking is why does it seem some readers accept Snape's (obviously biased) view of the story as what seems to be fact but often point out that Sirius should be taken with a grain of salt when he relays information about past events? I just want to know what makes Snape more believable here. Magda: > Also Sirius is maddeningly imprecise about dates and timing when he > talks about the past. This I can buy. :) Again, no snarkiness intended, really just curious, Kate From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net Mon Apr 4 22:52:18 2005 From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Richard Jones) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 22:52:18 -0000 Subject: Some More Questions and Comments on OOTP. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127091 I have finished my rereading of the OOTP and have some questions and comments: (1) What are the magical portraits in DD's office and elsewhere? They talk, have emotions, sleep, travel to other portraits. What are they and how are they created? (2) How do thestrals find places? (For that matter, how did post owls find Sirius when he was in hiding and how do they muggle houses like Hermione's?) Do they read the mind of their riders? I think London cabbies have to pass a written test on the streets of London because the place is so complicated, but the thestrals found London, the Ministry, and the visitors' entrance without any problem. (3) Why was there no night guard on duty at the Ministry the night of the battle? There was the might Sturgis Podmore was caught. Or was there a guard and the D.E.'s knocked him out and hid him (clearing the path for Harry)? How did LV waltz into London and the Ministry undetected? (4) Why were Harry, Ginny, and Neville entranced by the veil and the others not? Why could Harry and Luna hear voices and the others didn't? (5) The D.E. Dolohov tried to use "Accio Prophecy" to get the prophecy. Why didn't Lucius just use that from the start before Harry knew he was there? He could have avoided a fight that he lost. (6) The prophecy says "neither can live while the other survives." Well, aren't both LV and Harry living now? (7) All that stuff in the DoM on time: I'm guessing time-travel will reappear. (8) Notice how much more significant Hermione and Neville were in the DoM than Ron or Ginny. I'm thinking that means in Books 6 and 7, they will be still more prominent. And the fact that all six were in this fights means that all six will significant as a group in Books 6 and 7. (9) Ron's brain attack will be significant. DD said there will be no "lasting damage," but Pomfrey noted that "thoughts could leave deeper scars than almost anything." (10) Do Hermione's parents know about all the danger Harry keeps putting her in? And, if they do, what do they think about it? (11) I don't understand the significance of the scene with Luna saying that lost things will return and her easing Harry's pain a little. I can't believe it means that Sirius is going to return. (12) Harry is angry at the loss of Sirius, disappointed with DD, and depressed about the murder in the prophecy ? HBP ain't going to be no light comedy. Richard Jones From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Apr 5 01:02:08 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 01:02:08 -0000 Subject: ChoosingGoodnes/Snape/Albus/DragonMeat/Sex/Draco an Only Child /DE children In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127092 SSSusan wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126714 : << I think Nora's right in this. Look at Harry. He could easily have become a selfish, whining, angry bully based on his "inside" experience. But in fact he ended up quite different indeed from the example set within his family. And, since this appears to have developed in Harry prior to his entering Hogwarts -- without a whole lot of other "outside" examples for influence -- it's seems at least possible that Sirius experienced something similar. >> Catlady: > Harry had other influences than his home life -- television and > school surely prominent among them. I think his school would have > tried to introduce the students to certain moral virtues, whether > by preaching about the Good Samaritan or assigning reading books > about exemplary children. SSSusan: I don't think I disagree with you much at all, really. I was responding to elfundeb, who had been arguing that Sirius grew up in a family where "Mudblood" was used frequently in its pejorative sense, and that he likely wouldn't have had an opportunity to have learned otherwise -- to have been exposed to other views -- as a child. I didn't agree that that upbringing makes Sirius' behavior a *given*, just as I don't believe living with the Dursleys makes Harry's behavior a given. OTOH it may be that you are simply pointing out that Harry had two potential influences -- school & TV -- which Sirius did not have. This is so. But I would think that Sirius would have had books, at least, to offer up different viewpoints. Or contact with fellow burned-off-the-tapestry cousins or other relatives who might've given him a glimpse of another way of viewing muggle-borns? Siriusly Snapey Susan From mfterman at yahoo.com Mon Apr 4 23:56:38 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 23:56:38 -0000 Subject: Some More Questions and Comments on OOTP. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127093 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard Jones" wrote: > (1) What are the magical portraits in DD's office and elsewhere? > They talk, have emotions, sleep, travel to other portraits. What are > they and how are they created? While we have no hard details, it's pretty clear that magical portraits are in a sense mystic snapshots of people, carrying a bit of their personality and memories. Presumably they are painted by a wizarding painter who can capture something of the person they are making the portrait of. But in the end they are nothing more than magical paintings. > (2) How do thestrals find places? (For that matter, how did post > owls find Sirius when he was in hiding and how do they muggle houses > like Hermione's?) Do they read the mind of their riders? I think > London cabbies have to pass a written test on the streets of London > because the place is so complicated, but the thestrals found London, > the Ministry, and the visitors' entrance without any problem. Same way owls find places/people: magic. I know, that's not much an answer, but it's likely to be all the answer that we're ever going to get on these matters. > (3) Why was there no night guard on duty at the Ministry the night of > the battle? There was the might Sturgis Podmore was caught. Or was > there a guard and the D.E.'s knocked him out and hid him (clearing > the path for Harry)? How did LV waltz into London and the Ministry > undetected? Voldemort cleared away all the guards that night. He *wanted* Harry to walk into that trap unbothered. There's no hard evidence for this of course, but given the lengths that Voldemort was going to in order to ensure Harry went there, I assume that he would take steps to prevent Harry from being caught by the guards before he reached the Prophecy. I'm presuming that the other Death Eaters used their magic to kill or otherwise remove the guards that night, or perhaps Lucius or some other Ministry official used their influence that way. I tend to presume the former more than the latter. > (4) Why were Harry, Ginny, and Neville entranced by the veil and the > others not? Why could Harry and Luna hear voices and the others > didn't? This is one of those great unanswered questions that we may or may not get a straight answer to later. It is to be noted that Harry, Ginny and Neville had each faced more horror than the others, and to them death on some level might be more entrancing. > (5) The D.E. Dolohov tried to use "Accio Prophecy" to get the > prophecy. Why didn't Lucius just use that from the start before > Harry knew he was there? He could have avoided a fight that he lost. Presumably the prophecies were enchanted to resist such a cheap trick. They had to be removed by hand and only those directly associated with them could remove them safely. > (6) The prophecy says "neither can live while the other survives." > Well, aren't both LV and Harry living now? Metaphorically. Both Harry and Voldemort are to some extent trapped by thoughts of each other, their existances molded and shaped by the existance of the other. Harry is obsessed with Voldemort and the reverse is also true. Only when one of them is dead can the other one truly get on with their life. > (7) All that stuff in the DoM on time: I'm guessing time-travel will > reappear. We'll see. > (8) Notice how much more significant Hermione and Neville were in the > DoM than Ron or Ginny. I'm thinking that means in Books 6 and 7, > they will be still more prominent. And the fact that all six were in > this fights means that all six will significant as a group in Books 6 > and 7. Actually, if you had said Luna and Neville I would have agreed with you. Luna had one of the stronger presences, even if she accidentally nailed Ginny in the crossfire when she blew up Pluto. But Luna was the last of the girls to go down and the last of the ones still capable of working magic to go down (Neville being unable to cast spells at that point). > (9) Ron's brain attack will be significant. DD said there will be > no "lasting damage," but Pomfrey noted that "thoughts could leave > deeper scars than almost anything." It's a very interesting question what sort of person Ron Weasley is going to be in book six, especially now that he's on the other side of his bad patch of adolescence. > (10) Do Hermione's parents know about all the danger Harry keeps > putting her in? And, if they do, what do they think about it? Hermione's parents aren't terribly interesting, according to JKR. I have the feeling that they tend to leave their daughter to her own devices. They probably have no idea of how much trouble she gets into, and I doubt Hermione tells them either. > (11) I don't understand the significance of the scene with Luna > saying that lost things will return and her easing Harry's pain a > little. I can't believe it means that Sirius is going to return. No. Sirius is dead and not coming back, according to JKR. As for the rest of it, I think it was more her comment that they were just over on the other side that eased his feelings. > (12) Harry is angry at the loss of Sirius, disappointed with DD, and > depressed about the murder in the prophecy ? HBP ain't going to be no > light comedy. No, it won't be. I expect that the relationship between Harry and Dumbledore is going to be at an all time low in book six. "mfterman" From juli17 at aol.com Tue Apr 5 01:39:50 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 21:39:50 EDT Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127094 Kate wrote: > So, if someone could please explain to me why they do believe Snape in this > scene, that > Sirius indeed meant to actually *kill* him, I'd be really interested. > > thanks and best regards, Kate Julie says: I don't know that Sirius *meant* to kill Snape. But he did deliberately put Snape in harm's way (he knew Snape wouldn't resist the temptation to go to the Shrieking Shack). Whatever Sirius's conscious intent, death could have been the result. Sirius also endangered Lupin, though I doubt he even thought about that possibility. In that regard he is like Snape--they are blinded to reason when their emotions are deeply engaged. They are also blinded by their dislike for each other. Snape assumes Sirius wanted to kill him, which doesn't seem a far-fetched assumption given the enmity between them. Sherry wrote: So, how is Snape any better than Sirius? very curious, Julie says: I've only argued that in their interactions with *each other* they are similarly maturity-impaired ;-) Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Tue Apr 5 01:47:46 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 21:47:46 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 5888 Message-ID: <1a8.34fe3c72.2f834842@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127095 > I wrote earlier: > Even though Sirius knows Snape is on the side of good (we're assuming), he > doesn't let up on Snape either. The two just hate each other. It happens, even > between otherwise "good" people. > > > Jaanis replied: > I wanted to add that Snape *is not* a "good guy", and if I'm not mistaken, > Rowling has stressed this in a few interviews. Maybe you can put the phrase in > quotes meaning that he is with the OotP and against DEs and Voldemort, but > he is not a *good* guy. Me: I was using "good" in a general sense, but didn't JKR actually say that Snape isn't a "nice" guy? "Good" and "nice" aren't exactly the same thing, since the term "good" has a much broader range of definitions than "nice" does. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Tue Apr 5 01:50:54 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 21:50:54 EDT Subject: Apologies! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127096 Sorry, I forgot to change my subject line in my previous reply. My most abject apologies! To keep this on topic a bit, if Snape ever apologized to someone, who do you think it would be, and what would he apologize for? Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 01:55:22 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 01:55:22 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127097 Julie says: I don't know that Sirius *meant* to kill Snape. But he did deliberately put Snape in harm's way (he knew Snape wouldn't resist the temptation to go to the Shrieking Shack). Alla: Sorry, Julie, but right now I am going to dispute even that. :o) Sirius and Snape were not best friends before Prank ocurred, right? Snape is NOT stupid , right? Why would Snape listen to ANYTHING Sirius says? Why would he BELIEVE anything Sirius says? As Finwitch said, why would Snape even stop to have any kind of conversation with Sirius?. Julie: Whatever Sirius's conscious intent, death could have been the result. Sirius also endangered Lupin, though I doubt he even thought about that possibility. In that regard he is like Snape-- they are blinded to reason when their emotions are deeply engaged. They are also blinded by their dislike for each other. Alla: I am not even sure that Sirius' intent was for Snape to go there, although it could have been of course. It is also possible that Snape overheard something which he was not supposed to. But if Snape figured out that Remus was a werewolf ( I am not sure if you share the speculation that Prank ocurred after Pensieve scene), things are becoming very interesting. Sherry wrote: So, how is Snape any better than Sirius? Julie says: I've only argued that in their interactions with *each other* they are similarly maturity-impaired ;-) Alla: Sure, Julie that I can agree with and honestly, if Snape confined his remarks to people of the same size as he is, I would like him MUCH more. Just my opinion, Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 02:04:31 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:04:31 -0000 Subject: Apologetic Snape. Was :Re: Apologies! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127098 Julie: To keep this on topic a bit, if Snape ever apologized to someone, who do you think it would be, and what would he apologize for? Alla: LOL! Unfortunately I doubt that we will ever see apologetic Snape in the book. It would be nice though - I so respect people( and characters :o))) who can acknowledge that they are wrong . No, I think Snape believes that he is right in everything he does. Of course my "dream" Snape apology would be to Harry. No, I don't need him to say it in many words, beg and plead for forgiveness, just tell Harry that he is sorry for thinking that he is like James. Yeah, i can dream, can't I? I don't know if the speculation that Snape indeed loved somebody is correct, maybe we will see him apologising to such person. JMO, Alla From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 02:12:44 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:12:44 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <21724379.1112641279279.JavaMail.root@waldorf.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127099 >>Kate: >I just have a question, really, (not just to Betsy, to anyone who wants to jump in). And I am not trying to be snarky, I am really curious. >So, if someone could please explain to me why they do believe Snape in this scene, that Sirius indeed meant to actually *kill* him, I'd be really interested.< Betsy: You don't sound snarky at all. :) I don't believe Sirius meant to *kill* Snape. I agree with what Magda said in message # 127074: >>Magda: >Snape is so emotionally distraught that whether or not Sirius did intend to kill him through the Prank (and while I think Sirius is an idiot I don't think he was trying to kill Snape deliberately), there's no doubt that Snape sincerely believes that Sirius did.< Betsy: In other words, Sirius was probably not trying to kill Snape, but Snape *believed* that Sirius tried to kill him. And the fact that Dumbledore tells Harry that Snape owes James a life-debt (which sounds rather formal) because of the Prank, means that Dumbledore, James and Snape all agreed that Snape's life was put at severe risk (and James' life as well, I imagine) because of the prank Sirius played. It's not very smart to play with a werewolf. I think Sirius fell victim to familiarity breeding contempt. He was used to Lupin, even in werewolf form, not being dangerous to him. Sirius forgot just how deadly and irrational a werewolf is if one can't shift into an animal form at will. I do think that *Snape* still thinks Sirius cold-bloodedly set him up to be killed. After all, Sirius hated him, Sirius is a Black, and Snape is *very* familiar with how those steeped in the dark arts think. And Snape witnessed Sirius acting at his most Black-ish throughout their school career. The fact that Sirius doesn't seem at all repentant towards Snape, as far as Snape has witnessed, would only further Snape's belief that Sirius was really out to kill him that night. >>Sherry: >And while we are on that, I'm always curious why people consider sirius so terrible, refer to the fact that in OOTP he still hates Snape, hasn't matured, etc, etc. and yet, Snape hates Harry for the mere reason that Harry's father was James. >I also like the character of snape, because he is complex and has some deep issues, it seems. but I think that holding a grudge against a child because you hated his father is one of the most immature and ridiculous things possible. So, how is Snape any better than Sirius?< Betsy: Mmmm. I kinda set this question up, I think, because I said something about Snape being the better man. I'm rethinking that. Because I *do* like Sirius. He's intensely loyal and will go to the *wall* to protect those he loves. I think that's why Lily and James chose Sirius to be Harry's godfather (which answers a question posed by... Alla, I think?). They knew that if Harry was ever in danger (which wasn't an idle worry, what with the prophecy and all) Sirius would risk everything to protect their son. Which is born out in the books. Sirius risks everything, gives up everything, for Harry. However, I *don't* like how Sirius treats Snape in OotP. Sirius knows that Snape is one of the good guys now. He knows Snape is out there risking his life. And he knows that Dumbledore trusts Snape completely. And yet he just can't stop baiting Snape. He even belittles Snape in front of Harry just when Snape is being set up to teach Harry a vital skill. Not smart, and not mature. Especially when Sirius is the one on shaky moral ground. I don't think Sirius *meant* to almost kill Snape back in the day, but the fact is, he did. (The fact of the life-debt is what has me so sure the Prank was life threatening.) It would have been nice if Sirius had seemed just a touch apologetic. Of course, I think Sirius deals with feeling defensive by going on the attack. So he may have felt some remorse over what he did to Snape and Lupin (and James for that matter), he just wasn't able to show it -- to Snape at least. And of course, Sirius *was* emotionally stunted by his stint at Azkaban, and there's that theory he was being poisoned -- so maybe I've had too high expectations for poor Sirius. I'm also of the mind that Snape does *not* hate Harry. I think Harry annoys the crap out of him, but I don't think he hates Harry. So I don't think Snape is quite as emotionally immature as Sirius is. Which is good, because Snape doesn't have as many excuses as Sirius does. *g* Betsy, who got circular again, she thinks. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 5 02:17:58 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:17:58 -0000 Subject: Is Snape nice or good? (WAS: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <000001c53918$8ef8de40$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127100 Jaanis: I wanted to add that Snape *is not* a "good guy", and if I'm not mistaken, Rowling has stressed this in a few interviews. Maybe you can put the phrase in quotes meaning that he is with the OotP and against DEs and Voldemort, but he is not a *good* guy. Bookworm: I couldn't find a quote where JKR says Snape isn't a "good guy". I dod find one where she said is isn't a "nice guy". A subtle difference there. Here are a few of the quotes I found: Q: Who's your favorite character besides Harry Potter? A: It's very hard to choose. It's fun to write about Snape because he's a deeply horrible person. (www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/0999-familyeducation- abel.htm) Q: What about Snape? JKR: Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I myself had .... He's not a particularly pleasant person at all. (www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/1999/1099- connectiontransc.html) SF: Where as most of the characters, like Snape for example, are very hard to love but there's a sort of ambiguity I think is probably the best word.... and slowly we just get this idea that maybe he's not so bad after all. JKR: Yeees. You shouldn't think he's too nice, let me just say that. (www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2003/0626-alberthall- fry.htm) There's a quote relating to this subject floating around in my head that I think comes from a WWII general - something like "Yes, he's an SOB, but he's *our* SOB." Can any of our military/history buffs identify it? Ravenclaw Bookworm From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 02:27:54 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:27:54 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127101 Betsy: Mmmm. I kinda set this question up, I think, because I said something about Snape being the better man. I'm rethinking that. Because I *do* like Sirius. He's intensely loyal and will go to the *wall* to protect those he loves. I think that's why Lily and James chose Sirius to be Harry's godfather (which answers a question posed by... Alla, I think?). Alla: I am glad to hear that you do like Sirius, Betsy. :o) However I did not post that question at all, because I realise why Sirius was chosen as a Godfather. I did ask some other questions though, so if you feel like answering them, I refer you to my 127025 post. :) Betsy: I don't think Sirius *meant* to almost kill Snape back in the day, but the fact is, he did. (The fact of the life-debt is what has me so sure the Prank was life threatening.) It would have been nice if Sirius had seemed just a touch apologetic. Alla: No, sorry. I disagree that it is a fact that Sirius almost killed Snape. The fact is that Sirius told Snape how to get to the Shack. The fact is that getting to the Shack sure was life threatening does not translate to me into " Sirius almost killed Snape"( it is a possibility, but in my opinion only not a fact). If Sirius somehow brought Snape to the Shack ( Imperioed him as the most obvious example), then to me it would be a fact. Betsy: I'm also of the mind that Snape does *not* hate Harry. I think Harry annoys the crap out of him, but I don't think he hates Harry. Alla: I do. :) Just my opinion of course, Alla From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 5 02:56:32 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:56:32 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (and Life Debts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127102 Betsy: However, I *don't* like how Sirius treats Snape in OotP. Sirius knows that Snape is one of the good guys now. He knows Snape is out there risking his life. Bookworm: And Snape made cracks about how Sirius was snug and safe at home while others were out fighting the bad guys. Personally, IMHO, they are both over-grown bullies who haven't made any effort to get along with each other. I suspect that Sirius didn't intend to kill Severus but Severus will only think the worst of Sirius. (I'm anxiously waiting for JKR to fulfill her promise to tell us more about the Prank.) What we know is that Dumbledore told Harry that James had saved Severus' life. We have assumed he referred to the Prank, because Severus keeps accusing Sirius of trying to murder him. Is it possible we are being fooled - that this isn't the event Dumbledore referred to? Could there have been another time when James really did save Severus' life - from a real threat and not a prank? Or am I reading too much into Dumbledore's lack of specifics? Ravenclaw Bookworm From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Apr 5 06:44:28 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:44:28 -0000 Subject: Some More Questions and Comments on OOTP. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127103 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard Jones" wrote: Richard Jones: > I have finished my rereading of the OOTP and have some questions and > comments: > > (1) What are the magical portraits in DD's office and elsewhere? > They talk, have emotions, sleep, travel to other portraits. What are > they and how are they created? Geoff: There was some discussion on portraits about a year ago in a thread "Empty pictures" which started at message 95040. From rosie_27018 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 01:40:22 2005 From: rosie_27018 at yahoo.com (Ann Crutchley) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 01:40:22 -0000 Subject: Some More Questions and Comments on OOTP. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127104 Hi! New here. Your post is the first one I read. I don't have all the answers but maybe I can help with a few. (1) The magical potraits are former headmasters/headmistress of Hogwarts and where ever else their painting is hung or placed they can travel there hence spying on other people, rasing the alarm and such. (2) Hagrid trained them to take Dumbledore on long trips and to The Ministry of Magic. Owls are in sync with their owners is my best guess. (3) Good Question. I think the death eaters took care of the guard. So there was nothing to stop Harry from getting the prophecy. They did not know Voldemort was coming, it wasn't in the plan, the death eaters were to get the prophecy from Harry and return it to him. But when they failed Voldemort came himself. And with the guard out of the way there was no one to raise the alarm. And Fudge not believing that Voldemort had returned, why should he take precautions? And Dumbledore knowing Fudge wouldn't listen to him what could he do but go himself. Eventually of course Fudge arrived and saw for himself. (4) I do not know why Harry, Ginny, and Neville were entranced by the veil and not the others. I think that Harry and Luna could hear the voices maybe for the same reason they could see the thestrals and the others couldn't? (5) I think Lucius wanted to kill Harry and take pride in that. So he had to let Harry refuse so he could fight him and kill him; didn't work out so well. (6) Yes they are, but (in my opinion) they have transfered powers to each other and they are one with two souls. (7) If you read some of the essays on The Harry Potter Lexicon they have ideas that there are two time lines going on and that Harry might have to fix that. http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/ The Lexicon: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/ (8) I think they are all significant in their own ways. Harry is stronger with the help of Hermione and Ron. They all have had something that binds all six of them, Voldemort and what he's done to their families. (9) I'm sure it will be in some way. (10) It's never really been addressed except one time when she says her parents are muggles and don't read the daily prophet in GOF. So I would assume that they don't know or maybe know just enough. But Professor McGonagall does write to parents so I'm sure they know some, because Hermione has been to the hospital wing several times. (11) I hope it does because Sirius isn't dead, he's just missing! There probably isn't any significance of the scene. (12) Oh no it isn't, the end is near and I can't wait for number Six to come out, yet I can because I don't want it to be over just yet. But Harry will bounce back, I just hate he decided to go alone with the news instead of telling Ron and Hermione. I know he will eventually tell them, but what a burden to carry going back to the Dursleys' for the summer. Hope it helped, Ann Crutchley From ajroald at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 01:53:57 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 01:53:57 -0000 Subject: Weasley Cullings (Re: Full HBP cover artwork) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127105 > Andromeda: > Well, as a parent of young children, I can't help but notice that > all of children's literature/fantasy is filled with already dead, > absent, or actively slaughtered parents (Bambi, anyone?). I find > it somewhat disconcerting, myself. > > I, too, would not be surprised to see a Weasley or two culled in > book six. I can only hope it's Percy. Like most people, I'm fond > of the twins, despite the fact that they tend to do more harm than > good, and I do have some sympathy for the sometimes annoying > Molly. > Bill & Charlie do seem to be the most disposable Weasleys; where > a death would wreak great havoc on the Weasley family but not so > much on the reader. Must agree that we are apt to lose at least one Weasley in the course of the next two books, but doubt that it will be Percy. Why? Because to the readers he 'is' disposable. We don't care, and would actually prefer it be him. It is also hard believing it will be Ron, at least in book six (Jo may find a major drop in book sales for book seven if she does that). As a member of several boards and HP communities, it is amazing to see the 'fan' love of both Bill and Charlie (probably more so for Bill), especially since they really haven't played big parts in the series yet. It wouldn't be surprising if one or both of them plays a more significant role in the next book, possibly endearing the readers/fans to them more. At that point, it would make more of an impact if one were to die. Again, it seems more likely that one or both of the Weasley parents will be on the culling list. Andromeda, you make an excellent point when you say; "I can't help but notice that all of children's literature/fantasy is filled with already dead, absent, or actively slaughtered parents (Bambi, anyone?)." Was Remus Lupin's comment to Molly a foreshadow of future events (Do you think we'd let them starve)? Hopefully all this speculation is for naught, and our wonderful Weasleys will survive unscathed. ~ Lea From rosie_27018 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 02:01:30 2005 From: rosie_27018 at yahoo.com (Ann Crutchley) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:01:30 -0000 Subject: Snape's Stubbornness In-Reply-To: <1a8.34fe3c72.2f834842@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127106 > Jaanis: > I wanted to add that Snape *is not* a "good guy", and if I'm > not mistaken, Rowling has stressed this in a few interviews. > Maybe you can put the phrase in quotes meaning that he is with > the OotP and against DEs and Voldemort, but he is not a *good* > guy. Snape is on the good side, not necessarily a good person even Dumbledore has referred to that as an old man's mistake, that he let Snape teach Harry to control his thoughts when Snape couldn't get over what James and Sirius did to him in school. But being on the good side for how long? The mark burns his skin. Snape is cruel and out for revenge against Harry for what James & Sirius did. Someone should be questioning Snape and his motives; until we know why Dumbledore trusts Snape he could still be the enemy. Ann From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 02:01:54 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:01:54 -0000 Subject: Imposter Moody's (Crouch Jr's) Motives Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127107 Juliane said: > I am re-reading Goblet of Fire and just finished the bit about the Unforgivable Curses. Why would imposter Moody want to make sure Hogwarts students know all about these? Why would he be advising "Constant Vigilance!" if he is actually a Death Eater? What were his true motives? < Now Bonnie: If I remember correctly, Imposter Moody didn't really show the class HOW to do the curses. He did SHOW them the curses and what it was like to resist the Imperius Curse, which I believe only Harry could resist. Maybe he was only trying to terrify them. For 14 year old to see and imagine such things must have been really scary, especially since some of them had lost family members to the DEs (Neville for one). Remember in POA Chapter 8: ' "I didn't think of Voldemort," said Harry honestly, "I - I remembered those dementors." "I see," said Lupin thoughtfully. "Well, well....I'm impressed." He smiled slightly at the look of surprise on Harry's face. "That suggest that what you fear most of all is - fear. Very wise, Harry." LV working through Crouch Jr. may have been trying to weaken Harry by making Harry afraid. If Harry knew what awful curses LV could do, maybe he would be more easily beaten. Sorry but this gets me off on a new thought. Crouch Jr., innocence or guilt: Crouch Sr. does not appear to have been the best of fathers. As has been mentioned in a previous post (sorry, can't remember who) on the types of parents, Crouch Sr. was obviously a "black or white", "right or wrong" type. The most likely to produce, I believe, rebellion in your adolescents. Whether Crouch Jr. was totally guilty or not of the crime that sent him to Azkaban, I imagine him being totally fascinated by LV. We know LV (Tom Riddle) was always good at being able to "charm the people I needed." (COS, chapter 17). Then for Crouch Jr. to have his father turn on him so mercilessly and send him to Azkaban, must have totally turned him to the "dark side" if he wasn't already there. Crouch Jr. makes me feel very sad. I think he was just totally disillusioned and duped. How much free will did he really have? Bonnie From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 02:19:53 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:19:53 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127108 Steve/bboyminn said: > I think the Harry Potter books can and do help kids and adults come to an better internal revelation of right and wrong. They develop a sense of justice and injustice, and can be motivated to have the courage to stand up and take action in support of true moral right. Courage, justice, right, truth, conscience aren't these the true foundation of morality? I can't imagine that a parent could want more for the moral development of their kids or for themselves. < Bonnie now: I agree totally. Also the HP books, (and most "hero" fiction) promote the truth that standing up for the "true moral right" will always bring you out on the winning side in the end. I was watching something on LOR a while back and it mentioned how these stories take you to the point that you can't see how the "right" side can possibly win. Then the story does a huge U-turn and what do you know, the good guys win after all. It's sooo important for kids (and all of us really) to know that the "good guy" will ultimately win no matter how impossible or difficult it seems and that "some things are worth fighting for". Isn't apathy and fear the main environment that produces injustice in the first place? Bonnie From WNCMegs at aol.com Tue Apr 5 04:34:26 2005 From: WNCMegs at aol.com (Megan) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 04:34:26 -0000 Subject: Key at Bottom of HBP Promo Stand Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127109 Looking around on various Harry Potter fan sites that I happen to frequent periodically, I happened to notice a new posting on Mugglenet.Com (great site for those who have never been) and someone spotted a KEY at the bottom of the promo stand. (Go to the following link to see) http://www.mugglenet.com/viewer/?image_location=/hbpkey.jpg Could this key, as MuggleNet suggests, be a hint to the HBP or just a random oddity? What does everyone think? Here is a suggestion of mine... I know there has been talk of who gets Sirius' gold and house and stuff since he is no more (Megan wipes away tears while typing this). Maybe this is the key to Sirius' Gringotts Vault. OR, could this be a key to wherever Lily and James' things are being stored? Harry is coming to slowly gather more and more information on his parents and the people they were. Harry inherits things of his father's periodically, or a gift of use by SOMEONE. I cannot remember if it is each year, but I know he got the Invisibility Cloak in SS/PS, CoS: ???, PoA: Maurader's Map, GoF: Sirus's Knife, OotP: the 2-Way Mirror (though he didn't use it really). I have a feeling, though I could be dead wrong, that it has SOMETHING to do with the book. It was way at the bottom though, and might be a "Trademark Symbol" of Border's Books, or Scolastic Books. Whatcha all think??? I'd love to hear the speculation. :-D *Megan goes back to her "periodic" visits to other fan sites for more useless info* From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 05:41:04 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 05:41:04 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127110 > Grey Wolf: > *So what would Harry's animagus form actually be? A lion, maybe? > Harry can be described as calm and self-effacing except when push > comes to shove, when he becomes a tremendous fighter. Now, I just > have to try and match that to an animal... Chys: I think it has something to do with the physical aspect of it: Animagus, your body transforms, so it's what your body reflects; Peter was quite mousey you remember? McG. is like a cat, Sirius is doglike sometimes. Ok, so I think it's the physical resemblance that lets the transformation be easier, what they most resemble. For the Patronus I think it's more the spiritual- maybe he simply has his father's spirit? How could you relate that to the characters that have Corporeal Patronus in book V? Was Cho's a swan? - WHY do I think of a snake of all things at this *above* description? Well, the calm to berserker idea. Wouldn't it be funny if he were something like a monkey? *so off beat here* Strange enough, I can see him as a unicorn or something- the scar representing the horn. :P Just me, I guess. Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 06:02:09 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:02:09 -0000 Subject: Some More Questions and Comments on OOTP. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127111 > "Richard Jones" wrote: > (5) The D.E. Dolohov tried to use "Accio Prophecy" to get the > prophecy. Why didn't Lucius just use that from the start before > Harry knew he was there? He could have avoided a fight that he > lost. "mfterman" : > Presumably the prophecies were enchanted to resist such a cheap > trick. They had to be removed by hand and only those directly > associated with them could remove them safely. Chys: Uh, I think that was meant after it was picked up. In which case, he probably thought himself superior to a mere boy and so could get it from him or be rid of him easily enough and have fun with him in the process. Maybe he was just being stupid too. As well as this, in GoF, why did Voldemort release Harry from the tombstone to fight him? Same thing I think, superiority complex anyone? Chys From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 08:45:35 2005 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 08:45:35 -0000 Subject: Empty picture- Portraits- General Info & Links In-Reply-To: <406E90F0.000003.79911@GOLIATH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127112 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Pet" wrote: > ... In the room that Ron and Harry are sharing at Grimmauld Place > there is an empty picture that's always sniggering (Bloomsbury, p. 62, > p. 151). ... > > So, we've been wondering if and in what form Sirius will show up > again. What if the invisible occupant is teenage Sirius?... > > Pet bboyminn: Others have already answered that the Character in the Portrait is Phineas Nigellus, and are drifting off on the subject of Portraits in general. For anyone who is interested in the Nature of Portaits, here is my updated link list to past discussion, and some additional notes. These links will usually take you to the middle of a discussion, remember to read the post before and after the linked post to see what others had to say on the subject. Or jump to the very Short Version Summary at the end of this post. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - In any event, here is a list I complied of links about the nature of portraits, most of which, I think, are my own posts on the matter. ..., if you are interested in a more indepth analysis of Photos vs Paintings in the WW, please see my published works. Thu Sep 11, 2003 6:14 pm Re: photo vs. painting in magical world ... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80505 Sat Aug 2, 2003 12:20 pm Portraits http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/74923 Good thread, lots of discussion. See my post later in the thread Tue Aug 12, 2003 2:38 pm Paintings vs. Photos http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/76735 Long thread with many sub-threads. My posts are in a sub-thread. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/76837 Date: Tue Oct 5, 2004 1:25 am Subject: Re: Black magic -- effigy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/114806 Touches on the use of living tissue in creating Living Portraits. Date: Sun Oct 10, 2004 2:26 am Subject: Re: GH re-re-revisited - Portrait Spy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115319 On the Nature of Portrait and how they work. Date: Tue Oct 26, 2004 5:08 pm Subject: Re: Dumbledore- Time, Wisdom, & Spies http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116492 Dabbles in the subject of time and ends with Portrait comments. Date: Wed Oct 27, 2004 2:08 am Subject: Re: Dumbledore- Time, Wisdom, & Spies - Portraits http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/116528 Expands on the Nature of Photos & Portraits using analogy to TV & Film. In addition, we have new statements by JKR from Edinburgh in here latest book reading. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead people. They seem to be living through their portraits. How is this so? If there was a painting of Harry's parents, would he be able to obtain advice from them? A: That is a very good question. They are all of dead people; they are not as fully realised as ghosts, as you have probably noticed. The place where you see them really talk is in Dumbledore's office, primarily; the idea is that the previous headmasters and headmistresses leave behind a faint imprint of themselves. They leave their aura, almost, in the office and they can give some counsel to the present occupant, but it is not like being a ghost. They repeat catchphrases, almost. The portrait of Sirius' mother is not a very 3D personality; she is not very fully realised. She repeats catchphrases that she had when she was alive. If Harry had a portrait of his parents it would not help him a great deal. If he could meet them as ghosts, that would be a much more meaningful interaction, but as Nick explained at the end of Phoenix_I am straying into dangerous territory, but I think you probably know what he explained_there are some people who would not come back as ghosts because they are unafraid, or less afraid, of death. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Recently, were discussed whether Sirius would return to the story as a Portrait. Although not everyone agreed, most of us concluded that a portrait might be long on personality, but it would be very short on substance. JKR's recent comments seem to confirm that. Short Version Summary- This ties in very nicely with my posted theories that characters in photos and portraits are like actors in a play. Portraits are like the movie version of that persons life, they have a significant degree of personality, and some substance, but they are not the complete person. 'Actors' in a photograph have the equivalent character and substance as that of a person in 15 or 30 second TV commerial. You do get a sense of their personality, but there is virtually zero substance to them. So, basically, photos don't say much because they are idiots. Hope that helps. Steve/bboyminn From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 5 06:17:46 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:17:46 -0000 Subject: Some More Questions and Comments on OOTP. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127113 > "Richard Jones" wrote: > I have finished my rereading of the OOTP and have some questions > and comments: > (4) Why were Harry, Ginny, and Neville entranced by the veil and > the others not? Why could Harry and Luna hear voices and the > others didn't? Karen: I'm not going to attempt all of your questions, but I think that the answer to the second part of this question is that only Harry and Luna could hear the voices for the same reason that only Harry and Luna can see Thestrals: they are the only ones of that group at that time who have seen someone die. > (5) The D.E. Dolohov tried to use "Accio Prophecy" to get the > prophecy. Why didn't Lucius just use that from the start before > Harry knew he was there? He could have avoided a fight that he > lost. Karen: on a totally cynical note - because if he had the DEs would have immediately killed them all and that would have been the end of the story!! Karen From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 06:17:47 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 06:17:47 -0000 Subject: Snape/Peter and Life-Debts to James/Harry & Sirius/Snape fight In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127114 Betsy: > And the fact that Dumbledore tells Harry that Snape owes > James a life-debt (which sounds rather formal) Chys: Ok, does Snape serve out this life-debt to Harry now, since he's James's son? Is he somehow connected to the kid so he has to help him even if he doesn't want to, to fulfil some kind of magical contract? (I'm wondering if that's really the reason why he seems to hate him, rather than the simple fact that the kid looks so much like his father -Which Harry seems to think is the problem in his juvenile way of thinking.- Perhaps he's so angry and jumps the kid all the time because of the fact that Harry goes out to get himself nearly killed several times a year, when Snape's dutifully spending all of his time trying to keep him safe from harm!) Is this similar scenario going to happen to Peter Pettigrew now, because of a life-debt to Harry? (I would think during an important confrontation in the future.) Maybe because of that, Snape and Peter CAN'T hurt Harry, so of course, DD would think Harry were safe from Snape, even if he's not a 'good guy'? *is confused* About the Sirius and Snape issue; I think they are both acting immaturely. Sirius has his issues, and Snape's probably very stressed, but can't help it when faced with a demon from the past (Sirius) whom constantly haunted him, and continued to taunt him immaturely even to the current day. Not to say that Snape was innocent of that- he was also making remarks of Sirius being the one getting the lazy, easy way out, not contributing to the Order properly. Maybe it's just stress relief on both of their parts, falling back into a habit of shooting each other down. Chys From MadameSSnape at aol.com Tue Apr 5 08:56:33 2005 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 04:56:33 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127115 In a message dated 4/5/2005 4:41:42 AM Eastern Daylight Time, yami69hikari at yahoo.com writes: How could you relate that to the characters that have Corporeal Patronus in book V? Was Cho's a swan? ================ Sherrie here: If your theory is true (and I think it very well may be), then Cho's swan is a definite red flag - swans may be beautiful, but they're MEAN. Sherrie "My best friend is the man who'll get me a book I ain't read." - A. Lincoln [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 09:20:47 2005 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:20:47 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus vs your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127116 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" wrote: > > In short, I think that while the animagus form reflects your own > spirit, the form of the patronus reflect the spirit of who you call to > protect you - and Harry, in particular, calls upon his father. > > Hope that helps, > > Grey Wolf, bboyminn: Of course other are free to disagree, but I think Grey Wolf has the correct insight into Patronus vs Animagus. A Patronus is a protector, it is something greater than yourself. I see it as being similar to, in the Shaman tradition, a Spirit Guide or Animal Guide. There are source of wisdom and power, both a teacher and a protector. In a more Christian tradition, we might look at them as analogous to Guardian Angeles. The key is that they are an external spiritual representation. True, they are connnected to us in some way, connected in a way that is unique to us. But they are still external. The Anamagus on the other hand is very much and internal and very personal representation of yourself. It is an alternate form of you. Going back to the Shaman tradition, it possible that the animal a person is identified with is different than his Spirit Guide. For example, Running Bear (his name and animal identity) many have a wolf for a spirit guide. In the Christian tradition, Guardian Angeles frequenlty take the form or a death relative; father, grandfather, favorite uncle, etc.... But I think the key is that a Patronus is symbolic of a potector that is greater and wiser than yourself. Whereas an Animague, is a reflection of your true inner self. As to what Harry's animagus might be, independant of any thoughts or connection to Sirius, I consider that it might be a dog; large and powerful, but one of the friendly types. Harry is loyal, faithful, strong, and courageous; those are all very dog-like qualities. At least, that's how I'm seeing it at the moment; tommorrow, I might see it completely differently. Additionally, I think we should resist the urge to look exclusively at grand majestic animals like a lion, and concentrate more on the actual personality we see in Harry. Sirius's human persona had very many dog-like qualities. While I don't see animal characteristics that strong in Harry, I still say we should try not to be swayed by romantic desires to see Harry as some grand majestic animal. Just a few thoughts. Good to see Grey Wolf posting again, he is always well thought out and insightfull. Steve/bboyminn From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Apr 5 09:58:04 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:58:04 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127117 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greenfirespike" wrote: > > > I believe that a character's Patronus will take the same shape as > her/his Animagus. While we no conclusive evidence via canon, > because we have only been privy to either a character's Patronus or > Animagus, it appears they derive from the same internal thing. > I agree. When Harry teached the DA the Patronus charm we see that they take forms that seem to represent the characters pretty well (Cho was a swan, as I recall, and Hermione an otter). More significantly, in the Edinburgh chat JKR said that DD's patronus is a phoenix "which is very representative of him." So it does seem that a patronus, like the animagus form, is an animal form that represents the essential being of a person. This means that if Harry became an animagus (which JKR already told us he isn't going to), he would take the form of a stag. This makes sense because it has been emphasised that Harry is very like his father - not just physically, but in more essential qualities. Naama From jaanise at hello.lv Tue Apr 5 09:59:39 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 12:59:39 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Snape nice or good? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c539c6$2ee7acd0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 127118 > Bookworm: > I couldn't find a quote where JKR says Snape isn't a "good guy". I > dod find one where she said is isn't a "nice guy". A subtle > difference there. Yes, Bookworm and Julie, let it be a *nice* guy, my apologies. But the important part is what people understand when they hear someone is a good guy. And generally they're taken as more or less *nice* automatically. I was adding my note where you said it's hard to believe that Snape is really good and why Dumbledore trusts him if he's generally so mean, stubborn etc. So, Snape really is not so good after all, he's horrible, sadistic, not pleasant - from the quotes. We only call him good because he's on the OotP's side. And what about my example of Umbridge? Is she good or bad? She's neither on DE nor OotP side, I suppose? Jaanis From cat_kind at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 11:18:23 2005 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 11:18:23 -0000 Subject: Moral Ambiguity in Main Characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127120 abadgerfan2: > The first criticism was that the books "clearly teach that obedience to rules or morality is required only when such obedience serves you best." ... is do we want to teach our youngsters such values? < > bboyminn: > > Other have already made the key point which is that rules and law are not the same as morality. That which is immoral is not necessarily against the law, and that which is accepted by law/rules is not necessarily moral. Law and morality, while related, are not one and the same. > So, morality is not measured by adherence to rules and law, but by conscience, and a genuine sense of right and wrong. While Law and Morality, while related, are not one and the same. > On a long list of history's most honored people, among them Jesus, Ghandi, and others, you will find a list dominated by people who chose to live and die for Moral right, independant of or strongly in opposition to legal and bureaucratic /right/.< catkind: I agree strongly with this separation of morals and laws. I would also point out that morals can be a subjective question, and can depend on people's religion or world view. Different people have very different ideas about when it is morally wrong to lie, for example, or even kill (as execution, euthanasia, in a war etc.). There is certainly a theme in HP about morals being more important than rules - this starts right at the beginning of the series, with HRH going down the trapdoor to prevent a moral wrong despite this being totally against the rules and McGonagall's explicit orders. They are rightly commended for their judgement. In OotP it becomes even more clear, when a dictatorial regime is set up in the school, and it becomes even more of a duty for our heroes to resist that authority. Dumbledore even resists legal arrest. All absolutely right and necessary. I think perhaps the sheer frequency with which the issue of breaking rules to uphold right comes up conveys quite an anarchic message. Highly moral, but anarchic. However, I can certainly see where the original criticism is coming from. Rules are not only taken lightly in the series when they are in conflict with morals. There is a lot of difference between breaking a rule you feel is morally wrong, or to prevent disaster in an emergency situation, and breaking a rule because it is inconvenient to you and you won't be found out. I don't think Harry finds it morally wrong to stay in his dormitory after lights-out. Yet his wanderings are encouraged by Dumbledore giving him the cloak, and by Lupin returning the map. Yes, it's a minor issue, but imagine if all the students had invisibility cloaks and felt they had the right to go where they liked. I do get the impression that at times Harry thinks he's above the rules, and is being encouraged in this by his main authority figures: DD, Lupin, and Sirius. Of course, rulebreaking is common to most boarding-school books and most kids. The difference is that it seems to be encouraged by the authorial voice here. Even McGonagall exempts him from rules when Quidditch is at stake. I was actually a bit alarmed at the exemption made in allowing Harry a broomstick when the other first years aren't allowed one. I think that would generate an awful lot of resentment in a real school. (Perhaps this is a case where HP falls on the fairy-tale side of the divide instead of the realistic children's book side:-)) A lot of the time "our side" get away with things that would be considered horrific if perpetrated by "their side". For example, Arthur Weasley gets tickets for the world cup through pure corruption. Hermione blackmails Skeeter, the twins try to blackmail Bagman. Plenty of people have commented here about the nastiness of some of the twins' pranks, or the train stomping incidents. I think the polyjuice incident is pretty nasty too - stealing, drugging innocent bystanders, impersonation, and the moral cause there's dubious in my opinion too - whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? In this case, it turns out Malfoy is really innocent. I do think OotP starts to question this better, with the pensieve scene making Harry think, and the fact that Harry's disobedience in not practicing Occlumency indirectly results in Sirius' death. I was disappointed that after seeing the pensieve scene, Harry *still* didn't hesitate in dealing revenge on Malfoy. It remains to be seen whether he will pay more attention to Occlumency in the future. I hope he will agonise a bit about his attempt at an Unforgiveable too. catkind From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Tue Apr 5 11:52:02 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 19:52:02 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: <1112654327.32099.46804.m17@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112654327.32099.46804.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127121 Emma Hawkes wrote: >Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only >child? This one seemed obvious to me. Two self-centered people like Lucius and Narcissa do not have the time nor the patience to devote to more than one child. Imagine Draco as a baby! All that crying and fussing and the messes! Even with servants and nannies, it's far too difficult. I can just picture Lucius and Narcissa, lying in bed at 2 a.m. with Draco screaming down the hall in his nursery. "Is she going to get up and silence that caterwauling? I must search for a new nanny tomorrow. This one simply cannot deal with the child. How are we supposed to sleep?" Going through the infant stage once is bad enough - why on earth would they willingly do it again? They have their heir, thank goodness! Nicky Joe In a separate wing surely? Behind a silencio charmed door... Emma From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Tue Apr 5 12:01:31 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 20:01:31 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: <1112654327.32099.46804.m17@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112654327.32099.46804.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127122 From: "Grey Wolf" Subject: Re: Why is Draco an only child? --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Emma Hawkes wrote: > Given his family's obsession with bloodlines, why is Draco an only child? My own take on it is essentially historical: the Malfoys act in all respects as a classical family of nobility. For a noble family, the only three reasons to marry were titles, land and money (two out of three for best results :D ). Now, it is obvious that Malfoys aren't aiming for titles (that is, the only distinction they seem to want is that of pureblood, more on that later), nor are they hurting for money (clearly stablished in many places, particularly in the first couple of books, as well as in the frequent bribes used to remain in good standing). So the most logical aim must be lands, at this point. Nice summary. OTOH, this means that the system set up to encourage single births (of boys). This is not good for a social system. You need a spare in case something happens to the heir. And you need at least some people produing girls or all your little boys wind up with no one to marry. Emma From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Tue Apr 5 12:07:27 2005 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (Shanoah Alkire) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 12:07:27 -0000 Subject: Imposter Moody's (Crouch Jr's) Motives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127123 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote: > > Juliane said: > > > I am re-reading Goblet of Fire and just finished the bit about > the Unforgivable Curses. Why would imposter Moody want to make > sure Hogwarts students know all about these? Why would he be advising "Constant Vigilance!" if he is actually a Death Eater? > What were his true motives? < > > Now Bonnie: > > If I remember correctly, Imposter Moody didn't really show the > class HOW to do the curses. He did SHOW them the curses and what > it was like to resist the Imperius Curse, which I believe only > Harry could resist. > You may have noticed he focused specifically on the Imperius curse. I don't really think he was trying to frighten them, though it may have been an added benefit. After several years spent trying to resist the Imperius curse, I think he really wanted to teach anyone and everyone how to defeat it, so they wouldn't end up the way he did. Besides, when preparing a lesson plan, the easiest lessons to teach are the ones from personal experiance. Not to mention, teaching Harry to resist the Imperius curse, and making the portkey two-way made it possible for him to try to capture Harry personally, and gain points with Tom, after his Death Eaters failed to do it. "Constant Vigilance!", I think was part of trying to imitate the real Moody, though. > > Crouch Jr. makes me feel very sad. I think he was just totally > disillusioned and duped. How much free will did he really have? > As much as Harry has. It's all about the choices you make. He could have rebelled by running against his father for office, or any number of other ways. He had as much choice as Harry, or Tom did. --Arcum From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 12:27:36 2005 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 12:27:36 -0000 Subject: Some More Questions and Comments on OOTP. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard Jones" wrote: > > (3) Why was there no night guard on duty at the Ministry the night of > the battle? There was the might Sturgis Podmore was caught. Or was > there a guard and the D.E.'s knocked him out and hid him (clearing > the path for Harry)? How did LV waltz into London and the Ministry > undetected? Annemehr: Don't forget who some of the DEs were. Lucius Malfoy is very familiar with the Ministry, and Macnair was actually part of the Committee for the Disposal of Dangerous Creatures. Rookwood had been in Azkaban for years, but before that he was part of the DoM - was the one who told LV exactly who would be able to take the prophecy from the shelf. Since this was to have been a stealth operation, I assume they took care of the guards by Stunners or Imperius, and would have mopped up later with Memory charms. They wouldn't have killed anyone; that would have made even Fudge take notice. I also assume that LV could sense it when Harry had the complete vision of Sirius being tortured, so that he knew when to signal the DEs and Kreacher to set the plan in motion. Also, don't forget that when Arthur Weasley was attacked, the portrait (I forget who) was able to raise the alarm by shouting until somebody came. So there were normally people there at night. Richard: > (4) Why were Harry, Ginny, and Neville entranced by the veil and the > others not? Why could Harry and Luna hear voices and the others > didn't? Annemehr: This is a tough one; I think it's just the beginning of a plot arc. Harry, Ginny, and Neville were attracted to the veil; Luna seemed to understand it; Hermione feared it (but was that only for Harry's sake?); and we have no reaction from Ron. Of the people who were attracted by it, Ginny can't see Thestrals, but she did nearly die once, as has Harry. Were their reactions caused by their past experiences, eventual fates, or individual personal traits? Harry nearly walked right in, yet one year earlier he resisted the idea of being murdered so much that he fought back even though he had no hope. Richard: > (6) The prophecy says "neither can live while the other survives." > Well, aren't both LV and Harry living now? Annemehr: Actually, when you think about it, though Harry has his happier moments, there isn't really any part of his life that hasn't been touched and tainted by Voldemort. And it's only getting worse. I'm happy enough to interpret that phrase along these lines, that they are both merely surviving and not properly living, especially since their connection keeps strengthening. Richard: > (7) All that stuff in the DoM on time: I'm guessing time-travel will > reappear. Annemehr: I thought so too, but now I'm not so sure. It does help point up how dangerous it can be; perhaps they'll merely need to resist the idea. Perhaps actual time-travel is done with in this story. If anyone does more of it, I'm guessing it'll be the other side and the injured DE foreshadows that. Richard: > (11) I don't understand the significance of the scene with Luna > saying that lost things will return and her easing Harry's pain a > little. I can't believe it means that Sirius is going to return. Annemehr: No, I'm sure Sirius won't return. I think the image was to be that Luna would see her stuff again and Harry would see Sirius again (after his own death). Harry's pain was eased because he could see that Luna understood him having lost her own mother not so long ago. Pitying her also helped since it gave him a new, outward-focussed feeling. Finally, I think her calmness in the face of loss (the immediate and the remembered) was soothing, because her calm sprang from a hope that Harry could hope to share. Richard: > (12) Harry is angry at the loss of Sirius, disappointed with DD, and > depressed about the murder in the prophecy ? HBP ain't going to be no > light comedy. Annemehr: No, no light comedy, but I think Harry will be in a better state. He'll be treated better, for one, he'll be busy, and I believe he'll understand things better; that always helps a lot. Annemehr From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 12:52:54 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 05:52:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Snape nice or good? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050405125254.44071.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127125 --- JaanisE wrote: > So, Snape really is not so good after all, he's horrible, > sadistic, not pleasant - from the quotes. We only call him good > because he's on the OotP's side. Well, that's the only "good" that really counts in the end, isn't it? Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From kking0731 at gmail.com Tue Apr 5 13:25:00 2005 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 13:25:00 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127126 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "naamagatus" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greenfirespike" > wrote: > > > > > > I believe that a character's Patronus will take the same shape as > > her/his Animagus. While we no conclusive evidence via canon, > > because we have only been privy to either a character's Patronus or > > Animagus, it appears they derive from the same internal thing. > > > > > I agree. When Harry teached the DA the Patronus charm we see that > they take forms that seem to represent the characters pretty well > (Cho was a swan, as I recall, and Hermione an otter). More > significantly, in the Edinburgh chat JKR said that DD's patronus is a > phoenix "which is very representative of him." So it does seem that a > patronus, like the animagus form, is an animal form that represents > the essential being of a person. > > This means that if Harry became an animagus (which JKR already told > us he isn't going to), he would take the form of a stag. This makes > sense because it has been emphasised that Harry is very like his > father - not just physically, but in more essential qualities. > > > Naama Snow in agreement: In the World Book Day Chat Rowling made a direct connection between the Patronus and Animagus forms: "class 14: If you were a animagus which animal would you be? and why? JK Rowling replies -> I gave Hermione my idea animagus, because it's my favourite animal. You'll find the answer in the Room of Requirement, Order of the Phoenix!" ************* Rowling was asked in this instance about her likely animagus form but replied with Hermione's Patronus form. I thought that she may have misunderstood the question but in an earlier interview she answers that her animagus would be an otter: "About the Books: transcript of J.K. Rowling's live interview on Scholastic.com," Scholastic.com, 16 October 2000 Question: If you were Animagus, what kind of animal would you be? J.K. Rowling responds: 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. ************* Also from the World Book Day Chat: What form does Dumbledore's Patronus take? Good question. Can anyone guess? You have had a clue. There was a little whisper there. It is a phoenix, which is very representative of Dumbledore for reasons that I am sure you can guess. ************ As I recall Dumbledore's patronus in POA when the dementors attacked Harry during a Quidditch match, his patronus was indistinct. The animagus however is depictive of your personality and Dumbledore is very representative of a phoenix; he can lift heavy objects with ease i.e. "Dumbledore bent down, and with extraordinary strength for a man so old and thin, raised Harry from the ground and set him on his feet." GOF pg. 672; Dumbledore strikes fear into evil persons like Voldemort (the only one he ever feared) and gives strength to those like Harry who are faithful i.e. "A powerful emotion had risen in Harry's chest at the sight of Dumbledore, a fortified, hopeful feeling rather like that which phoenix song gave him." OOP pg. 139. One of the only things left that is representative of a phoenix that Dumbledore has yet to purely exhibit is that his tears have healing powers, we know he shed at least one tear but whom did it help heal? There is also the fact that a phoenix is reborn in their ashes but again that may be yet to come. Rowling answers that your personality dictates what animal your animagus is: America Online chat transcript, AOL.com, 19 October 2000 Does the animal one turns into as an Animagi reflect your personality? 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! ********** So if Dumbledore's personality is representative of a phoenix and your personality shows what type of animagus you would become, wouldn't Dumbledore's animagus be a phoenix? Rowling answered that Dumbledore's patronus was a phoenix so I would have to believe that the patronus and animagus would be the same animal. Snow From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 14:10:08 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:10:08 -0000 Subject: Is Snape nice or good? In-Reply-To: <20050405125254.44071.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127127 > --- JaanisE wrote: >> So, Snape really is not so good after all, he's horrible, >> sadistic, not pleasant - from the quotes. We only call him good >> because he's on the OotP's side. > Magda: > > Well, that's the only "good" that really counts in the end, isn't it? Any means to achieve an end? Not a principle that's gotten unqualified support so far in the series, it seems to me. One question which is not really solvable right now is whether it is (good, right, take your pick of adjectives) to tolerate behavior that is generally not considered (insert positive adjective here) because the person carrying it out is also responsible for things that are (second positive adjective here). The more interesting question, IMO, is whether such negative behavior (things which are not nice, and not meaning 'nice' in the shallow sense of the word--things such as "horrible and sadistic") are not contrary to the achievement of ultimately good things. I tend to think that one of the themes of OotP is that little everyday behavior does indeed matter in the larger fight. Trust was something needed and sorely lacking between any number of parties of the white hats, but trust is not something built up solely from large, abstract "good" behavior that has not even been obviously manifest, but from cognizance of character, which depends on the everyday. In that regard, and I humbly submit that *so far* this has been supported textually as well, being not horrible is an important (but not sole!) component of the good. As in all things on this topic, future revelations could cause profound re-readings of past events. Which is to say, it ain't set in stone. -Nora gets back to books of hours From finwitch at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 14:27:28 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:27:28 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127128 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145": > Rowling answers that your personality dictates what animal your > animagus is: > > America Online chat transcript, AOL.com, 19 October 2000 > Does the animal one turns into as an Animagi reflect your > personality? > 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! > > ********** > So if Dumbledore's personality is representative of a phoenix and > your personality shows what type of animagus you would become, > wouldn't Dumbledore's animagus be a phoenix? Rowling answered that > Dumbledore's patronus was a phoenix so I would have to believe that > the patronus and animagus would be the same animal. Finwitch: I'd say that, they could be, but are not so by default. Your Patronus takes a form by which you feel protected, safe - maybe even happy. Harry feels protected by his father (thus, his Patronus is not merely a stag, but *Prongs*) And the night he cast his first Corporeal Patronus - was the night when the *idea* of his father protected his sanity - and that he thought that *his father* had been the one to send that Patronus. Me, I see Harry's nature to be more like a bird (natural flyer) than a stag (OK, so James was good in Quidditch, too). He felt caged in CoS - much like poor Hedwig. He narrowly escapes death several times. We'll never know - as JKR told us Harry won't become an animagus - but I think if he did, he'd be a bird. A sparrow, maybe. Or a robin. As for Dumbledore, he feels protected by Fawkes. With all the losses he's seen, Fawkes will *never* truly leave him. The rebirth of the Phoenix gives him hope in the face of the closing death. The loyal Phoenix *has* rescued him - taken the AK for him - carried him away - selling Fawkes' feathers saved him from extreme poverty (and he'd be able to make a wand if he ever lost his using a feather of Fawkes') - the Phoenix song encouraging him when he feels down... tears healing him even from something as lethal as the basilisk-poison (as well as puncturing the lethal eyes of the snake)... but mostly, I think, the FAITHFUL. 'they make very _faithful_ pets' -- why did Dumbledore emphasize the word *faithful*? Only Harry's *true loyalty* to Dumbledore could summon Fawkes to him. Guess Fawkes also helps him to trust. About Dumbledore's animagi - he's too trusting to be a bird. Birds are generally NOT very trusting. They'd fly away if you try to go near, you know. Dumbledore has tendency to like sweets (all those passwords) and he cares for the young, refusing a higher post while still trying to influence everyone. I see him as a bee or an ant -- a very social being, staying near the same place and liking sweet... Or maybe he's a Demiguise-animagus, thus being able to become invisible without a cloak. Finwitch From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Tue Apr 5 10:57:07 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 10:57:07 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127129 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chys Sage Lattes" wrote: > > Wouldn't it be funny if he were something like a monkey? *so off > beat here* Strange enough, I can see him as a unicorn or something- > the scar representing the horn. > > :P Just me, I guess. > How's your Philip Pullman? Remember that Lyra's mother, a morally ambiguous character in spades until the end (presumably ...), has a monkey for a daimon, and the authorial comment is that it is apparently incredible but true that the woman and the ape (sorry - wrong book!) should be the same, but they are. A good way to resolve it would of course be to see MM's Patronus; if it's a kitty, or a sabre-toothed tiger, then QED. I've been puzzled about Harry's Patronus - the way people kept on nailing Sirius for thinking that Harry was a rerun of James instead of his own person in his own time, but they do seem to be identical on that very intimate level. Where does Lily come in? Someone imagined her Patronus as a dove; I've always imagined something like a hawk or a kestrel, not sure why. Oh well, perhaps in HBP the answers they do lurk! Deborah From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Tue Apr 5 11:08:44 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 11:08:44 -0000 Subject: Is Umbridge on the side of good or bad? (was Re: Is Snape nice or good?) In-Reply-To: <000001c539c6$2ee7acd0$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "JaanisE" wrote: > > > [I]t's hard to believe that Snape is > really good and why Dumbledore trusts him if he's generally so mean, > stubborn etc. So, Snape really is not so good after all, he's horrible, > sadistic, not pleasant - from the quotes. We only call him good because > he's on the OotP's side. > > And what about my example of Umbridge? Is she good or bad? She's neither > on DE nor OotP side, I suppose? > Deborah now: She's a useful idiot, I think - not even a fellow-traveller. She's Organisation Woman, a born bureaucrat, and she genuinely believes that Rules Are Right. Remember when Henry II said 'Who will rid me of this troublesome priest?' and then was upset when the eager beavers went off and murdered Becket? She's have murdered anyone if the rules said so or someone in authority requested it. As I'm typing, she's sounding more and more like Eichmann. This needs more thought! Deborah From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Apr 5 14:54:49 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 14:54:49 -0000 Subject: Is Snape nice or good and other current Snape threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127131 Potioncat: I may have merged two threads in this post, but I've included post numbers for each heading. Here's my reactions to several posts. Thanks to Penapart Elf who helped me through some of the techno- problems of combining posts. 127094 Kate wrote * So, if someone could please explain to me why they do believe Snape in this > scene, that Sirius indeed meant to actually *kill* him, I'd be really interested. snipping Julie's answer Potioncat: There are two camps here: those who find Black more reliable and those who trust Snape more. Depending on the day of the week or phase of the moon, or the horoscope, you'll find more of one than the other and it'll sway the posts. I'll echo what others have said, Snape truly thinks Black was trying to kill him. Swayed toward Snape, you understand his anger at having been put into such a dangerous situation. From his standpoint, the two possible outcomes were that he would be killed or become a werewolf. From Black's standpoint (assuming he was impulsive and not really trying to "hurt" Snape) the outcome would be that Snape would be scared out of his wits. So adult Snape still thinks Black was trying to kill him and adult Black thinks Snape deserved the scare. Look at it from Dumbledore's point of view. (Assuming a lot here.) One student is a conniving boy who has talent and potential. The other is an impulsive, talented boy who has moments of cruelty. Both have some family history to overcome. The boys loathe each other, but they are as similar as they are different. Dumbledore sees a spark in each of them and has a fondness for each of them. Severus has been made the butt of a very dangerous joke. We don't know the whole story. Neither, it turns out, does Dumbledore. But he knows something we don't. He has two boys before him, both with potential and a latent goodness if you will. What to do? Although the risk was there (that seems undisputed among the characters) no harm was done. So he took whatever action and time moved on. Black and Snape of course, did not. Imagine your younger brother or your son was tricked into going to a swimming pool where an alligator had been hidden. What would you think of the trickster? Now imagine your younger brother or son was the trickster. What do you think now? As for reliability, whenever Snape speaks about the Marauders, or one of them talks about Snape, I don't take it as reliable at all. 127097 Alla: But if Snape figured out that Remus was a werewolf ( I am not sure if you share the speculation that Prank ocurred after Pensieve scene), things are becoming very interesting. Potioncat: By the OWLs, both Severus and Remus were 16. Not sure about James and Sirius. Just tossing that bit of clue out there. It may be as important as Mark Evans. We know Snape was reading over the test. We know there were several questions about werewolves on it. We don't know what portion Snape was reading. The vampire section, perhaps? And we know much later, Snape will use a DADA lecture/assignment to reveal Lupin. But we don't really know (yet) if he suspected anything that night. You would think, if he expected to see a werewolf, he would have gone in better prepared. Actually, I can't wait to find out just what did happen...knowing very well, I might not. 127100 Bookworm: There's a quote relating to this subject floating around in my head that I think comes from a WWII general - something like "Yes, he's an SOB, but he's *our* SOB." Can any of our military/history buffs identify it? Potioncat: The "good, not nice" argument gets worked over twelve ways from Sunday. So I think I'll adapt the above quote: Snape's an SOB, but he's our SOB. Excuse me, I meant to say, "Professor Snape is an SOB, but he's our SOB" I am firmly set on the idea that Snape is a patriot, working for the good of the cause. He is not a pleasant man. Being on the side of good isn't going to make him a pleasant man. But he has come through in ways that other "good guys" haven't. 127118 Janis wrote: And what about my example of Umbridge? Is she good or bad? She's neither on DE nor OotP side, I suppose? Potioncat: Now, there's an interesting thought. She is also a genuinely unpleasant person, and in my mind much worse than just unpleasant. She certainly uses any means to an end, including illegal means. At the time of OoP, it appears she is no supporter of LV, but she abhors Dumbledore. Her mindset is more closely aligned with LV's philosophy, and I can't see her supporting DD in anything. Whether she would actively support LV is another question Nora wrote: snip > In that regard, and I humbly submit that *so far* this has been > supported textually as well, being not horrible is an important (but not sole!) component of the good. > Potioncat: But for some reason, JKR has put Snape here. For some reason she has both DD and McG supporting and trusting Snape. I suspect there's a reason, or maybe a lesson here. I'm not sure who will get the lesson, Snape or Harry. OK, I've lost the number for Nora's post. But hers is the one I actually "replied" to. Shesh! You have no idea how long this has taken! From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 5 15:38:18 2005 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 16:38:18 +0100 (BST) Subject: Pineal Gland in Harry Potter Message-ID: <20050405153819.65839.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127132 Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 From: "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)": I suppose the various times characters visit Dumbledore's office on school business is part of the story rather than alchemical symbolism (was it Dean who said that the Sorting Hat had told him that Harry had killed a basilisk with that sword on Dumbledore's wall? So Harry is not the only student who visits DD's office and converses with the Sorting Hat). Is there an alchemical meaning to Harry smashing stuff in Dumbledore's office in the end of OoP? Hans: I think there probably is, but I haven't discovered it yet. I must humbly admit that compared to the amount of symbolism I have NOT figured out, the amount I HAVE figured out is very small. Just the main outlines I guess. There will be many things I'll NEVER figure out in this lifetime as they're too advanced. Jo's knowledge of alchemy is totally mind-blowing. Rita: To the portraits of deceased Headmasters? Hans: Yes, that one I do know. That's easy because this is very similar to "The Alchemical Wedding". On the Fourth Day Christian Rosycross and the other candidates for the Alchemical Wedding go up "the royal winding staircase". At the top they find the king and queen in all their glory. This is a future picture of the married spirit and soul, the aim of the Alchemical Wedding. After that they see the six royal couples who are later beheaded. They are the grey king (Lupin) the black king (Snape) and the prince and princess who are resurrected by their sacrifice. Then Christian Rosycross reports that he sees a large number of "moving images" in the background. He says they "moved as if they were alive". These are what I think the portraits of ex-headmasters represent. To explain this fully it would be best to paraphrase Jan van Rijckenborgh in his commentary, "The Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosycross". Chapter 7 of Vol. 2 explains that the pineal gland is filled with minuscule golden crystals or granules, and that the surface of this tiny pea-sized gland is also covered with hundreds of crystals. He says that these crystals are related to memory, intelligence and mentality. A very intelligent person has more crystals on the surface of the pineal gland than an unintelligent one. Whenever we think, these crystals or grains on the surface retain and reflect thought-images and send them to the crystals inside the gland. The pineal gland is therefore covered with countless tiny eyes which receive thoughts and retain, reflect and radiate them. The crystals on the INSIDE are related to the hereditary and karmic condition of the person concerned. In other words: the past. Past images. Past occupants of the office. A small step in logic, as I hope you'll agree. These crystals catch thought-images which are the "moving images". Jo is describing the activities of the pineal gland to us. Rita: I was taught that 'brow chakra' is Another Name for 'third eye chakra'. I *think* that is what Catkind (see below) meant by saying: << Actually, a lot of traditions have the crown chakra associated to the pituitary gland and the brow chakra to the pineal gland. >> Were those traditions misled by something more alchemical than the physical position of the first two eyes? Hans: You had me wondering so I checked. In liberating alchemy there are the three chakras in the head: the pineal chakra, the brow chakra and the throat chakra. I've used crown chakra just so it would be more familiar to people. The pineal gland is the third eye because, as is demonstrated by Moody, the third eye can see in all directions, even through the head. The many instruments of observation in Dumbledore's office tell of the same thing. I can see how the brow chakra would look like a third eye because it's situated on the forehead. In that sense it is a third eye, of course. But that's not the one I'm talking about. As a matter of fact the brow chakra is also related to the consciousness-I, situated behind the forehead. In book 7 we'll see Harry being liberated in the consciousness-I and gaining the eternal divine consciousness. I've explained that many times, and also in my essay. I wouldn't use the word misled. I'd say we're talking in different terms. Rita: D'you remember a book called POWERS OF MIND by 'Adam Smith' (who earlier wrote THE MONEY GAME and SUPERMONEY)? My recollection is that he's talking about stress-related diseases -- 'fight or flight' -- sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems -- and he says something about 'hypo' means 'under' and 'thalamus' means 'wedding bed' in Greek, so the order to flee or fight comes from under the wedding bed. "Very insightful, Dr. Freud." Hans: I was told thalamus meant wedding chamber rather than wedding bed. The alchemical wedding chamber. From the ridiculous to the sublime. Thanks for your comments and questions. "if I talk too freely about [if I believe in God] I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books." JK Rowling _____________________________________ Hans Andra see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://www.harrypotterforseekers.com Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Apr 5 16:04:17 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 16:04:17 -0000 Subject: Is Umbridge on the side of good or bad? (was Re: Is Snape nice or good?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "deborahhbbrd" wrote: > > > Deborah now: > > She's a useful idiot, I think - not even a fellow-traveller. She's > Organisation Woman, a born bureaucrat, and she genuinely believes that > Rules Are Right. Remember when Henry II said 'Who will rid me of this > troublesome priest?' and then was upset when the eager beavers went > off and murdered Becket? She's have murdered anyone if the rules said > so or someone in authority requested it. > > As I'm typing, she's sounding more and more like Eichmann. This needs > more thought! > > Deborah Hickengruendler: I think it's even more than that. She does not simply believe, that rules are right, she uses the rules to make her own wrongs right (partly through the Educational Decrees). If she were only a woman who slavishly believes in the rules, than she would never have sent Dementors to "silence" Harry, she would never have tortured school children with that quill, she would never have used her position to humiltate Sybill Trelawney like that. I think she is a major villainess and everything she does is to further hew own personal agenda. She is as evil as Voldemort or Bellatrix; she just couldn't show it as openly, because her aim is not to destroy or fight the wizard society, but to raise to power by (seemingly) legal means. The rules are just a tool for her. Hickengruendler From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 16:31:06 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 16:31:06 -0000 Subject: Is Umbridge on the side of good or bad? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127134 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "JaanisE" wrote: > > And what about my example of Umbridge? Is she good or bad? She's neither > > on DE nor OotP side, I suppose? Deborah now: > > She's a useful idiot, I think - not even a fellow-traveller. She's > Organisation Woman, a born bureaucrat, and she genuinely believes > that Rules Are Right. > Deborah Eustace_Scrubb now: Well, if she genuinely believes that the Rules are Right, she certainly seems to believe that she only has to follow those that seem convenient to follow at any given moment. I find it difficult to believe that there were not rules against the sending of dementors to attack unsuspecting teenagers (well, one unsuspecting but prepared and the other a clueless muggle) in the London suburbs. Not to mention using Unforgiveable Curses on Hogwarts students. I think I'd characterize Umbridge's belief as "the Minister is Right," and that all actions taken to carry out his wishes are acceptable. An interesting question might be whether this loyalty is to Fudge himself or to any Minister of Magic. This belief seems to be pretty close to (or possibly a logical extension of) that attributed to Bartemius Crouch Sr. when he was head of Magical Law Enforcement in Voldemort War I. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb (who just thought of another Umbridge question, but guesses he'll put that in a later message rather than muddy up this thread further.) From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 17:44:41 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:44:41 -0000 Subject: Empty picture- Portraits- General Info & Links In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127135 bboyminn: > In addition, we have new statements by JKR from Edinburgh in here > latest book reading. > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead people. > They seem to be living through their portraits. How is this so? If > there was a painting of Harry's parents, would he be able to obtain > advice from them? > > A: That is a very good question. They are all of dead people; they > are not as fully realised as ghosts, as you have probably noticed. > > The place where you see them really talk is in Dumbledore's office, > primarily; the idea is that the previous headmasters and > headmistresses leave behind a faint imprint of themselves. They > leave their aura, almost, in the office and they can give some > counsel to the present occupant, but it is not like being a ghost. > They repeat catchphrases, almost. > > The portrait of Sirius' mother is not a very 3D personality; she is > not very fully realised. She repeats catchphrases that she had when > she was alive. > > If Harry had a portrait of his parents it would not help him a > greatdeal. If he could meet them as ghosts, that would be a much > more meaningful interaction, but as Nick explained at the end of > Phoenix_I am straying into dangerous territory, but I think you > probably know what he explained_there are some people who would not > come back as ghosts because they are unafraid, or less afraid, of > death. > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > Recently, were discussed whether Sirius would return to the story > as a Portrait. Although not everyone agreed, most of us concluded > that a portrait might be long on personality, but it would be very > short on substance. JKR's recent comments seem to confirm that. > > Short Version Summary- > > This ties in very nicely with my posted theories that characters in > photos and portraits are like actors in a play. > > Portraits are like the movie version of that persons life, they > have a significant degree of personality, and some substance, but > they are not the complete person. > > 'Actors' in a photograph have the equivalent character and > substance as that of a person in 15 or 30 second TV commerial. You > do get a sense of their personality, but there is virtually zero > substance to them. > > So, basically, photos don't say much because they are idiots. > > Hope that helps. > > Steve/bboyminn Eustace_Scrubb now: I agree fully with you on the photographs. The photographs don't even have the capability of speech. It's just a silent film loop, really. On paintings, I'm not sure I think JKR's explanation is completely consistent with the evidence within the books. I guess my primary nitpicks are with the travelling portrait subjects, Phineas Nigellus, Everard and Dilys. They have sufficient substance that they can understand and carry out instructions as well as understand and respond to rather complex discussions in Dumbledore's office. They are capable of learning...Phineas Nigellus probably wasn't alive at the time of Sirius' birth but he understands their relationship. There's a lot more than "catchphrases" going on there. The other question is related to the concept of "realisation." None of the paintings are as "fully realised" as ghosts; Mrs. Black is "not very fully realised," presumably when compared to the headmasters and headmistresses at least. So why is one portrait more fully realised than another? Does it vary with the skill of the artist? or with the length of the sitting? can the sitter affect the degree of realisation, say, by cooperating more or less with the artist? Some of those questions become meaningless if the portraits are only created after the subject has died, although that's not exactly what JKR says. She just parrots the questioner: "Q: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead people..." "A: ...They are all of dead people..." So all of the paintings we've _seen_ are of dead people; we don't know whether the paintings were created during their lifetimes or not. My own guess/leap/intuition would still be that some level of interaction between magical artist and sitter would be necessary to create these portraits and that the level of artistic skill and artist-sitter cooperation would determine how "fully realised" a given portrait would be. Mrs. Black, being an intolerant, prickly personality, undoubtedly was a most difficult sitter--hence her unpleasantly batty portrait. The headmasters, mindful of their place in history, undoubtedly cooperated better with the artist. I'll bet that powerful wizards and witches could also manage to ensure that their preserved personality/intellect showed their best sides,too. If this is right--and I don't think what JKR has said above rules it out yet--then we won't be seeing any portraits of Sirius unless one was completed before his death. And I know there's been some speculation about Dobby's picture of Harry--unless Harry was actually sitting for the portrait _and_ Dobby's a competent magical artist (maybe house elves have different methods than wizards, of course), then I doubt there's much hope that will have any role to play. In the muggle world, having an oil portrait of one's self or one's family has been an economic status symbol over the centuries. Further the number of artists generally considered competent has been small. However magical portraits are created, it seems unlikely that there would be loads of competent artists (especially as it doesn't seem to be a subject taught in Hogwarts) or a huge customer base. And as to the genre pictures that seem to abound at Hogwarts...presumably these are much closer to the photographs. The people may simply be artistic creations, fictional characters. What personality we see in these folks was probably a creation of the artist him/herself--there may be bits of various real people in some of them, but they're just characters in a landscape. Anyway, that's my current 2 knuts. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Apr 5 17:59:58 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:59:58 -0000 Subject: Whither Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127136 Whither Snape? A few Snape thoughts, inspired by a number of recent threads but not responding to any one in particular. SNAPE'S CHOICES I see Snape as a bundle of conflicting needs which he's too immature to resolve. There are a lot of immature aduts around Harry, which conveniently makes their motives something Harry, or any child his age, could comprehend. But it's not unusual, in the aftermath of a catastrophe, to have a "lost generation" who violate the norms of adult behavior. I think many in the Marauder years had to raise themselves because their parents were either overtaken by the disaster or had to neglect their offspring in order to deal with it. Harry knew when he was Sorted that he could either be a decent wizard or a badass Slytherin, and he chose to be a decent wizard. Riddle chose the opposite, AFAWK. But Snape wants to be both, IMO. To be more specific, he'd like to treat other people as if he were a Malfoy or a Black, but he wants others to treat him as if he were McGonagall. That's not the only conflict. Snape wants to be a big bad scary Slytherin and he wants to win the order of Merlin. He wants to teach DADA, and he wants to see Potions get the respect it deserves. He wants to uphold Dumbledore and put Harry down. He wants to go back to hating James's memory in peace -- but when did hatred ever bring anything but conflict in the long run? Snape has a lot of choices to make, and I don't think we'll know what he is until he's made them. Yes, he's a sadist, and he probably always will be. But I think Rowling wants us to see that he could learn to control it, just as Ron learned to control his jealousy, Hermione has to control her interfering ways, and Harry has to control his anger. SNAPE'S HATRED I don't think Snape hates Harry as a person, though I've gone back and forth on this. I think Snape hates a lot of the things that Harry stands for, and a lot of the things that Harry's done or failed to do, (or that Snape thinks he has.) I don't think Snape picks on Harry because he's a kid any more than Harry was picking on Dudley in OOP because Dudders is a Muggle, or Sirius was picking on Kreacher because Kreacher is a House Elf. The power differential made it possible, but it wasn't the reason. I don't think that Snape has something against kids in general, only kids who remind him of James. That Harry isn't James is irrelevant to how Snape feels. As in Kreacher's case it wasn't Kreacher but Kreacher's family who was the real target of Sirius's hate. I know not everyone agrees with Dumbledore about this, but think about it. Sirius might have been deeply amused by Kreacher's recalcitrance, if only he'd been Molly's Elf instead. In the same way, I don't think Snape would have any special beef with Harry if Harry didn't look so much like James, and didn't project what Snape thinks is the same superior attitude. TEACHING Snape's teaching style is probably the only one that worked with him. Teaching Snape was probably like teaching the proverbial mule: he'll respond to kindness, but you might have to hit him over the head with a two by four first to get his attention. Snape, having failed to get Harry or Neville's attention, as shown by their consistent disregard of his instructions, thinks he has to keep whacking away at them. It could be he was as surprised as anyone to see that Harry did a better job at potions without Snape carping at him. SNAPE AND JAMES We are told that James was everything Snape wanted to be, but we aren't told how James felt about that. I wouldn't be surprised if James wanted to feel that he was graceful, good-looking, popular, wealthy and well-born because he deserved to be, not because he was just lucky. Much more comforting to find fault with Snape, who after all knew so much forbidden magic and had such a churlish attitude toward Lily, than to think that all James's blessings were mere luck and might be gone in a turn of fate. Snape's into Dark Arts so he deserves to be a loser, right? Of course James knew quite a lot of forbidden magic too, and for most of his time at Hogwarts seems to have been far more of a trial to Lily than Snape -- but it seems that James never quite learned that Gryffindor is as Gryffindor does. ROWLING ON SNAPE I probably have a tendency to soften Snape's character a little too much, looking forward to what he might become if some of his rough edges are ever polished. And Rowling's comments don't encourage one to think they will be. But it strikes me that some of Rowling's comments on Snape might be a trifle disingenuous -- when she seems to be mystified at why people like him or nonplussed by some of the theories. If she followed the fandom closely enough to know that people were spinning wild theories about Mark Evans, surely the much larger body of speculation about Snape could not have escaped her notice? SNAPE'S FATE I think Snape is going to have to make some of the choices I listed above, positively, I hope. His anger and his distrust of Harry may hinder him, but if there's a disaster it will probably be brought on more by Harry's unjust anger and inability to let go of a grudge than Snape's. At the end of OOP, Harry was blaming Snape for Sirius's death in much the same way that Snape seems to blame Sirius for luring him into the werewolf's lair. And Harry has told himself that he's never, ever going to forgive. Pippin From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 18:04:11 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 18:04:11 -0000 Subject: Sense of Humor was Re: pictures of the founders In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127137 Carol: > I agree with JoAnna. It's a bit of comedy on the same level as his > "few words" at the beginning-of-the-year banquest in Harry's first > year (which, IIRC, is our first hint of his taste for puns). But the > Chocolate Frog cards show just a touch of very human vanity in > Dumbledore (who also, we find, occasionally needs a chamber pot and is > miserably inept in his choice of Bertie Botts' beans). I think all > these instances bring him down to our level a little bit. He's not a > clone of Gandalf--or any other character we've ever seen. > > Carol Eustace_Scrubb: Dumbledore's certainly no clone of Gandalf. But this is the wrong example to use in that regard. Gandalf had a humorous streak in him not at all unlike Dumbledore's--and not just in _The Hobbit_, though it comes through mostly in his dealings with hobbits (just as Dumbledore's comes through mostly in dealings with the students). In each case, the "Big People" don't seem to get it. They just see the big powerful wizard lowering himself by involving himself with inconsequential matters--a mistake some of the "Big People" later come to rue. I could definitely see McGonagall nervously asking Dumbledore outside #4 Privet Drive, "You will keep an eye on him, won't you Albus?" to which the reply would be: "Two eyes, as often as I can spare them!" Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Tue Apr 5 19:29:22 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 19:29:22 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127138 Emma said: > Nice summary. OTOH, this means that the system set up to encourage > single births (of boys). This is not good for a social system. You > need a spare in case something happens to the heir. And you need at > least some people produing girls or all your little boys wind up > with no one to marry. > > Emma Most feudal systems have encouraged single births - and the WW is very middle-age-ish in its social configuration. And I agree that it's not a good social system (more because of the drive towards inbreeding than anything else), very few social systems are used because they're good - when you get right down to it, our own modern world has a extremelly bad social system for those living in the best conditions. However, I do disagree with your stated reasons. Producing "spares" in case something happens to the heir in a system where bones can be regrown overnight, falls from several stories high are of no moment and even the smallest child is protected from almost everything the natural world can throw at them (sure, Harry was protected from the AK because of the Love Shiled, but I assume it was regular magic that protected him from the house). No, the bad thing about having a single child is that there is no generation substitution - put mathematically, the growth rate is negative: fewer people in each subsequent generation. And that is obviously a bad thing. On the subject of the system encouraging male births, too, I feel that there is not enough cannon to make a reasonable deduction. There has not been, to date, that I remember, a clear case of female discrimination (unless you count the CoMC class that Ms. Grubby-Plank gave on unicorns, and that was female positive discrimination). In sports, the teams seem to be unbiasedly mixed (except for Slytherin, and it has been pointed out that in their case they're only aiming for physical supremacy to play foul anyway). Indeed, we don't know what the inheritance rules are, but I'd be surprised if there where clauses against women inheriting. The WW depends heavily on magic, and from Hermione's example, it is obvious that women are not at a disadvantage as oposed to the usual "I can bash you with a sword you couldn't even lift so that makes me the one making the rules around here" kind of justification that placed women in thrall of men for most of our history. However, once again going historical, it has been a regular fact that female children would be married off with a big dowry while the eldest male would inherit the title, and WW could be following the rules. It is just that I haven't really seen that reflected in the books - although I'm willing to listen to cannon either way. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf, manually editing the length of his lines so that they won't be too long for yahoo groups - even though he is using the on-line text box From alexisnguyen at gmail.com Tue Apr 5 19:52:55 2005 From: alexisnguyen at gmail.com (Alexis) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 15:52:55 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: References: <1112654327.32099.46804.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127139 > Nice summary. OTOH, this means that the system set up to encourage > single births (of boys). This is not good for a social system. You > need a spare in case something happens to the heir. And you need at > least some people produing girls or all your little boys wind up > with no one to marry. > > Emma The Brits practiced a "heir and spare" system, actually - second sons having more of an opportunity to make a name of themselves than any other child, with the obvious exception of the first born - so the Malfoys having only one child is quite odd if one assumes that the WW follows the same Brit system. However, given that magic appears to be able to reduce a great deal of childhood diseases, problems, ect., one can also gather that the need for a spare is also greatly reduced. Therefore, if we follow the logic that the Malfoys entered into an arranged marriage, they would do no more than their duty as far as children are concerned. Upon producing a reasonably sane heir and having little need for a spare, especially considering the period of time when that child would be born, the Malfoys just went on their merry way and forgot about producing another child. (Per the girls, the chance of producing a female is 2:4, so while the social system may seem to encourage unusual ideals, there were, obviously, enough girls coming along so that the male heirs didn't have too much of a problem getting a wife. Besides, this was a social system that applied to only certain members of the populous, and on top of that, if one was wealthy enough, a pretty woman of lower birth may find herself a high-born husband, especially if he is in need of money for the family coffers.) Ignoring all that, though, it does seem as if the WW generally just had small families, not surprising considering the correlation between a more established society and a lower birth rate. I would tend to go for this somewhat boring explanation than the tie in with the British upper class and their marital habits. ~Ali From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Tue Apr 5 20:03:49 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:03:49 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus vs your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127140 > bboyminn: > > > > As to what Harry's animagus might be, independant of any thoughts or > connection to Sirius, I consider that it might be a dog; large and > powerful, but one of the friendly types. Harry is loyal, faithful, > strong, and courageous; those are all very dog-like qualities. > > At least, that's how I'm seeing it at the moment; tommorrow, I might > see it completely differently. Additionally, I think we should resist > the urge to look exclusively at grand majestic animals like a lion, > and concentrate more on the actual personality we see in Harry. > Sirius's human persona had very many dog-like qualities. While I don't > see animal characteristics that strong in Harry, I still say we should > try not to be swayed by romantic desires to see Harry as some grand > majestic animal. > > Just a few thoughts. Good to see Grey Wolf posting again, he is always > well thought out and insightfull. > > Steve/bboyminn Nah, I don't see cats, big or small, as majestic. If I had wanted to go majestic, I'd have mentioned wolves. ::extreme grin, with *many* teeth:: I think lions popped into my mind because the males ones always seem to be hanguing around, never doing much (lionesses being the ones that hunt), but the moment they *do* need to defend their pack, they are amazingly strong and brave and so on. Mind you, the next thing that pops to mind when you think of lions is sexual ability, and so far Harry has demonstrated the dating abilities of a brick, so it doesn't really fit him all that well. Regarding the dog as a possibility, I'm rather doubtful too - but then, I'm not a dog person, and I tend to associate the qualities you described to wolves rather than to dogs (which I see as loud obnoxious creatures). And Harry is *so* not wolf-like. Actually, another animal that came to mind was the weasel (famed for being extremelly ferocious when cornered), but I restrained because, well, it was a footnote and I didn't want into the whole "yes, Ron *is* surnamed Weasley, which sounds like weasel, and that might foreshadow something but really right now Harry is more like it". I'm still not particularly thrilled by the comparisson, but for the sake of completeness, it is here. Thing is, when you're trying to describe a boy that has faced dragons, spiders by the score and dementors by the hundred (as well as assorted trolls, DEs, giant snakes, et cetera ad nauseam), it is hard to not go for the majestic. I mean, a lamb he is not. Most plant-eaters have similarly need to be discarded. But in fact, there is one animal that you mentioned (not in connection to Harry) that does rather fit the bill: bears. They have the same "fantastic fighter when cornered" ability I mentioned above, but mostly they tend to be calm, with a tendency to solitude and, for creatures who regularly weight several hundred kgs and measure up to 5 metres (I think), they're rather self-effacing. And anyone daring to claim that Harry is not the grumpy kind has not read books four and five :D. Mind you, bears still fit the "majestic" brand, but do so only slightly, I feel. They're majestic when stuffed into a permanent "roaring with paws up" pose hunters dream the bear had when they shot him in the back, but when you think of the bear going about its business, eating berries and small animals and fish, he's far more cuddly than a half-ton animal deserves to be. In a completely tangential topic, by the way, I wonder, bboy, did we ever resolve the bloody timetable problem? I vaguely remember we were close to breaking it into something that was physically possible last time, but I have long since forgotten the details (hopefully, it was you the one I bounced numbers with, and not some other poster). Hope that helps, Grey Wolf, who is glad to be back P.D.: Am the only person who is reminded by this topic of Sinatra's song about being a donkey, or a pig, or a fish...? From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Tue Apr 5 20:25:17 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:25:17 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127141 Another thought that just came to me on this subject - a though that, had I been quicker, I would've included in my previous post in the subject (sorry for cluttering the board with unnecesary messages), I have to point out that we seem to be giving up on Malfoy and Narcissa a little too early in the game. What I'm refering to, of course, is the fact that Wizards seem to be able to live past their 150th birthday with ease. Not counting the freak case of Flammel, Dumbledore is 150 and the person who took his OWL levels is still around! No matter how you look at it, the fertile period of WW must be quite a bit longer than that of us regular muggles, and given that I'd say the Malfoy Sr. has, tops, 50 years (more likely in his 40s, since he is still young enough to participate in the "drunken" games of muggle baiting in the World Cup*), he has still got a long time to father any other offspring, if Draco turns out to be a major dissapointment. The way it might be happening, the pure blooded families might have children quite spaced out, so they can bring up each in the complete luxury they're due because of their high station. In fact, I just realised that the Malfoy don't criticise the Weasleys so much for having too many children, as for the fact that they have more than they can afford. In a slight tangential, it is interesting that the extended lifetime doesn't affect the WW more than it does - promotion congestion, extended education, late childbirth, etc that we see going on in our world. Of course, it might be happening and Harry just didn't notice (although I rather hate that explanaition - which unfortunately does kind of fit Harry, who seems to after 5 years still get surprised by the WW). Hope that helps, Grey Wolf *By this I don't mean that, at 50, he'd be physically incapable of participating - after all, they do age slowly too. Just that I would expect that at 50 he'd start thinking beneath him that kind of mob torture, when the time would be much better used by torturing muggles in his own mansion's torture chamber while savouring a nice cognac. From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 20:43:14 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:43:14 -0000 Subject: Umbridge's goal calling in Dementors Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127142 Umbridge tells Harry when she's about to Crucio him in her office: "'Somebody had to act', breathed Umbridge, as her wand came to rest pointing directly at Harry's forehead. They were all bleating about silencing you somehow - discrediting you - but I was the one who actually did something about it... only you wriggled out of that one, didn't you, Potter? Not today though, not now -' And taking a deep breath, she cried, 'Cruc-' "(OoP, Chapter 32, "Out of the Fire") Did she expect that the Dementors would successfully administer the Kiss, thus eliminating this irritation permanently? Or as Senior Undersecretary to the Minister, was she aware that the Potter boy had already survived at least one Kiss attempt from a swarm of Dementors and was in fact capable of producing a corporeal Patronus that would be sufficient to ward off two Dementors? If the latter was it a setup to provoke underage magic/magic performed in front of a muggle and thus a charge that could at least get Harry expelled and possibly sent to Azkaban? Or was it "If the dementors don't get him the Wizengamot will?" I suppose it doesn't make too much difference, except perhaps to delineate the extent of Dolores' evil. Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 5 20:57:41 2005 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Hans=20Andr=E9a?=) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 21:57:41 +0100 (BST) Subject: My predictions in April 2003 Message-ID: <20050405205741.12324.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127143 Hans: This is why I predicted in April 2003 what was coming in future books, and I was very happy to see many of my predictions verified even as early as book 5. catkind: Message number? Hans: 55793 of 21-04-03. In my post 67775 of 06-07-03 I explained how my predictions came out. At that stage I hadn't even realised fully just how exactly, so to summarise: 1. the liberation of the mental-I: Harry's ability to throw Voldemort's possession off by his love of Sirius. 2. the Jupiter initiation: Harry's appointment as leader of Dumbledore's Army. Jupiter was the leader of the gods and this initiation means taking a leadership role in the liberation of others. 3. the Saturn initiation: The Gate of Saturn is the gate of death and we see this clearly in the archway with the veil. At this stage Harry hasn't gone through it, but he will. 4. the Venus initiation: The "Room of Love" in the Department of Mysteries is so obviously similar to the same room in "The Alchemical Wedding" that there is no doubt that they symbolise the same thing. It is equally obvious that book 6 will tell us more about this room. As this room contains "Lady Venus" in "The Alchemical Wedding" the connection with Venus is obvious. Book 6 will deal with the liberation of the emotional-I in the heart. That will be the climax. In my recent long post replying to catkind's questions I listed various people and places that symbolise aspects of the heart, or the heart region. They may all come together here. I could imagine a scenario where Voldemort and Harry both try to get to the Room of Love for some reason. Percy's ambitions may by this time have gone up in smoke and he may be the one helping Harry get into the Room. As Lily symbolises the eternal spark of the Spirit in the heart I suspect her body is in that room, being "studied" by the unspeakables. Book 7 will deal with the liberation of the consciousness-I in the head. I feel that the Gate of Saturn or archway in the Department of Mysteries will come into this, as passing through this gate means overcoming death. I will do my best to answer catkind's other points later. "if I talk too freely about [if I believe in God] I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books." JK Rowling _____________________________________ Hans Andra see you at Harry Potter for Seekers http://www.harrypotterforseekers.com Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies. http://au.movies.yahoo.com From Jen at alveymedia.com Tue Apr 5 15:55:50 2005 From: Jen at alveymedia.com (Jennifer Nielsen) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 09:55:50 -0600 Subject: Is Krum a DE? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127144 As astute as this list is, I?m sure I?m reviewing old material, but here goes... In my reread of GOF, I?ve wondered if Krum is a DE in training. Karkaroff is, and Harry was told that Karkaoff trains his students in the dark arts as often as possible. And, Krum is clearly Karkaroff?s favorite student. JKR has said that we?ll see more of Krum, IIRC. Any thoughts? Jen [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sunnylove0 at aol.com Tue Apr 5 21:07:55 2005 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 17:07:55 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127145 In a message dated 4/4/2005 7:58:17 PM Mountain Standard Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: Alla: Sorry, Julie, but right now I am going to dispute even that. :o) Sirius and Snape were not best friends before Prank ocurred, right? Snape is NOT stupid , right? Why would Snape listen to ANYTHING Sirius says? Why would he BELIEVE anything Sirius says? As Finwitch said, why would Snape even stop to have any kind of conversation with Sirius?. RedHen has an excellent essay on his website with a possible theory about a lot of Sirius's bad behavior, including the Prank, called "Man's Best Friend". He talks about Sirius's behavior in OOP as being consistent with long standing alcoholism, and how this might have started in the Black house (look at his mother, too). And that the Prank might have started when Sirius just let something slip while he was drunk. It's a theory, anyway. _http://www.redhen-publications.com/MansBestFriend.html_ (http://www.redhen-publications.com/MansBestFriend.html) I recommend all of the others, too. Amber [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mwburge1 at aol.com Tue Apr 5 17:55:42 2005 From: mwburge1 at aol.com (mryburge) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 17:55:42 -0000 Subject: History at Hogwarts (was Re: Wizard Persecution ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127146 SSSusan: > > So my guess would be that Binns is just JKR's giving us a > > stereotypical boring history teacher, just as Madam Pince is a > > stereotypical severe & shushy librarian, just as Trelawney is a > > stereotypical daft & clueless "fortune-teller." I've NO idea why DD > > allows Binns and Trelawney to teach if they're really not all that > > good, but I can't imagine that he would cave to Ministry pressure to > > teach a watered-down history curriculum, where important but > > upsetting facts have been removed to "protect" children's > > sensibilities. I have always been struck less by Binns being a boring teacher, and more by what he is teaching each time JKR mentions him - wars! (Goblin rebellions, Giant war, Giant rebellion). Through the most boring teacher at school, JKR subtly reinforces that the magical "creatures" kept under control by the Ministry of Magic don't LIKE their situation, and the WW's treatment of them has caused huge problems in the past. Harry's befriending of, and by, all sorts of magical creatures (house elves, centaurs, werewolves, 1/2 giants, etc.) is striking in contrast to the rest of the WW's treatment. "mryburge" From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Apr 5 21:25:17 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 17:25:17 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Krum a DE? Message-ID: <1c4.25aa4ee4.2f845c3d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127147 In a message dated 4/5/2005 2:18:31 PM Pacific Standard Time, Jen at alveymedia.com writes: As astute as this list is, I?m sure I?m reviewing old material, but here goes... In my reread of GOF, I?ve wondered if Krum is a DE in training. Karkaroff is, and Harry was told that Karkaoff trains his students in the dark arts as often as possible. And, Krum is clearly Karkaroff?s favorite student. JKR has said that we?ll see more of Krum, IIRC. Any thoughts? Jen ***************************************************** Chancie: I don't believe Krum is a DE. It's true he's Karkaroff's favorite student, but Krum doesn't seem to feel the same way about him. I think Karkaroff likes Krum so much, because he's famous, and sees him as his best chance of winning the TWT for their school. If Krum was really a DE, he would have been much more likely to try and hurt Harry. Not only that Krum was obviously very taken with Hermione in GOF, she's known to be a Muggleborn, and that definitely isn't acceptable in the DE camp. I do however remember JKR's statement, I wonder when he'll be back?? Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Tue Apr 5 21:34:17 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:34:17 -0000 Subject: Umbridge's goal calling in Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127148 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > > Did she expect that the Dementors would successfully administer the > Kiss, thus eliminating this irritation permanently? I think that was probably her intent, yes. > Or as Senior Undersecretary to the Minister, was she aware that the > Potter boy had already survived at least one Kiss attempt from a swarm > of Dementors and was in fact capable of producing a corporeal Patronus > that would be sufficient to ward off two Dementors? I have to wonder, however, how the Senior Undersecretary to the Minister - or even the Minister himself - would know, at the time the order was issued, that Harry could succesfully produce a corporal Patronus strong enough to ward off two dementors. The fact is that Harry's ability wasn't out in the open until after the attack at the start of OotP, unless you count the time when Harry "patronused" Malfoy & co. at the quidditch match, and the time Harry "patronused" a boggart during the third task of the Triwiward Tournament. Neither reflect the reality of a true Dementor attack - in particular, how much harder it is to generate happy thoughts when the Dementors are busy drawing all heat and light and happiness from the very air. Remember that Harry's best patronus, at the lake, was witnessed by none but the Dementors and Harry himself. During the conversations following the scene, Snape cannot (or doesn't want to) tell the Minister that a Patronus was what saved them, much less that it was Harry the one that did it. > If the latter was it a setup to provoke underage magic/magic performed > in front of a muggle and thus a charge that could at least get Harry > expelled and possibly sent to Azkaban? Apart from what I've said above, I feel that Umbrigde probably cannot bring herself to believe that Harry - or any other child - can have enough power to create a Patronus enough to defend himself from a concerted attack by two Dementors. This is the same woman that feels that anything beyond reading the theory in class is too advanced and dangerous for children. As a case in point, Dolores, in that facet, reminded me of the kind of parent that is forever protecting the child from anything that they feel they're unsuited to see/hear - getting to the point where swearwords and anything remotely sexual or violent must be banned from his/her education (particularly TV). That kind of extreme position is, IMO, as bad as a complete laisez-faire, and JKR is pushing the point too, through Dolores. > I suppose it doesn't make too much difference, except perhaps to > delineate the extent of Dolores' evil. I have the feeling that we have not been told exactly what went on in the Dementor attack. Either JKR was sloppy, or we will be coming back to this (or a third, unseen by me, possibility, of course). It is a way too open attack, and too easily waved away as a rash action from Dolores, I think, to explain why a woman - even one as thoroughly cruel as Dolores - would set two killers on an unruly child. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 21:34:35 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:34:35 -0000 Subject: Is Krum a DE? In-Reply-To: <1c4.25aa4ee4.2f845c3d@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127149 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: > I do however remember JKR's statement, I wonder when he'll be back?? > > Chancie GEO: He could possibly as one of the foreign wizards that DD and Charlie manage to bring into the conflict on the side of the Order of the Phoenix in HBP. From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Apr 5 21:35:44 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 17:35:44 EDT Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? Message-ID: <8c.245ad368.2f845eb0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127150 Sorry for bringing this up. I'm sure it's been discussed, but I never have much luck when searching for posts. I always seem to come up with the exact opposite of what I'm looking for. But my question is, does anyone think the current owner of the Riddle house is important? Or have any guesses as to who he/she is? All that I remember from GoF, is that they have it for "tax purposes" or at least that's what the locals think. It just strikes me kind of odd that JKR mentioned that it was owned by someone who never went there, wouldn't it have been easier to just say that it was abandoned, if it weren't to come in to play later on? Any thoughts? Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Tue Apr 5 21:42:45 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:42:45 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: <8c.245ad368.2f845eb0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127151 Chancie said: > But my question is, does anyone think the current owner of the > Riddle house is important? Or have any guesses as to who > he/she is? All that I remember from GoF, is that they have it > for "tax purposes" or at least that's what the locals think. It just > strikes me kind of odd that JKR mentioned that it was owned by > someone who never went there, wouldn't it have been easier to just > say that it was abandoned, if it weren't to come in to play later on? > > Any thoughts? > > Chancie This group being how it is, there is always someone that feels that any detail, real or imagined, factual or implied or deduced, is important. I remember back in the days I used to post regularly this topic came up. IIRC, the two runners up to "relevant character that owns the Riddle House" were the Malfoys and Dumbledore. The Malfoys are a good possibility because they have the cash and they would love to have access to anything related to Voldemort - not to mention that it is a stylish place. However, I'm far more in the Dumbledore camp in this issue, because of the fact that the ageing muggle gardener has been kept in his post, and that Dumbledore would want to keep an eye on any place that Voldemort is likely to visit if he ever tries to come back. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Apr 5 21:43:00 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 17:43:00 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Krum a DE? Message-ID: <1c3.25f218e4.2f846064@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127152 In a message dated 4/5/2005 2:36:42 PM Pacific Standard Time, greatelderone at yahoo.com writes: GEO: He could possibly as one of the foreign wizards that DD and Charlie manage to bring into the conflict on the side of the Order of the Phoenix in HBP. *************************************** Chancie: Good idea! Especially since he would have knowledge of other students coming from his school that already have training in the Dark Arts. He could be very helpful in that aspect. And the look on Ron's face... It would definatly make for interesting reading!!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 21:57:19 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:57:19 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: <8c.245ad368.2f845eb0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127153 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: It just > strikes me kind of odd that JKR mentioned that it was owned by > someone who never went there, wouldn't it have been easier to just > say that it was abandoned, if it weren't to come in to play later on? > > Any thoughts? GEO: If it was made abandoned as you suggested then who would have been paying Frank to maintain and watch over the grounds of the house? From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Apr 5 22:33:26 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 22:33:26 -0000 Subject: Umbridge's goal calling in Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > > Did she expect that the Dementors would successfully administer the > Kiss, thus eliminating this irritation permanently? > > Or as Senior Undersecretary to the Minister, was she aware that the > Potter boy had already survived at least one Kiss attempt from a swarm > of Dementors and was in fact capable of producing a corporeal Patronus > that would be sufficient to ward off two Dementors? > > If the latter was it a setup to provoke underage magic/magic performed > in front of a muggle and thus a charge that could at least get Harry > expelled and possibly sent to Azkaban? > > Or was it "If the dementors don't get him the Wizengamot will?" Pippin: I'm sure Dolores thought through as many outcomes as she could imagine and decided none of them were worse than doing nothing. Her situation is more desperate than it appears. Surely Dolores knows that Fudge has been filling his pockets with Malfoy jingle and that Harry has told Fudge that Malfoy is a DE. If people start believing Harry, then her career and her reputation will be beyond saving. Never mind whether Voldemort is really back or not -- if he is, her boss is toast anyway. So the worst that can happen if her plan succeeds is that it will all come out and Dolores will earn herself an all expenses paid stay in Azkaban -- exactly where she'll end up if the Wizengamot learns that her boss was taking Death Eater bribes, er, contributions to worthy causes, and she knew about it. Pippin From mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net Tue Apr 5 21:59:01 2005 From: mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net (mallrat42g) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:59:01 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: <8c.245ad368.2f845eb0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127155 I think no one important owns the Riddle House. It hasn't been mentiond since the end of GOF, and it was stated in the book that there have been several owners since the deaths of the Riddles. Also the current owner of the hose was said to keep it only for taz reasons. I think that if a wizaring family owned the house, they wouldn't need to keep a house for tax reasons, they don't seem to have to pay taxes to the British Government One thing you should remember is that Tom, now Voldemort, hated everything about his past. He hated it so much that he killed it. The only reason why he used the house in the first place was because he needed the graveyard down the hill from the house. I think the Riddle House has no significance in the novels anymore. -Mall Rat p.s. Shopping rules! From mfterman at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 21:49:45 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 21:49:45 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: <8c.245ad368.2f845eb0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127156 My own feeling is that Voldemort bought it a while back through some Muggle proxies. I think the idea of owning the Riddle estate appealed to him. Remember that he killed the family back in 1945. It's not like he hasn't had plenty of time to purchase it. That's why he was so comfortable using it as a base of operations. From jaanise at hello.lv Tue Apr 5 22:33:38 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 01:33:38 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Umbridge on the side of good or bad? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c53a2f$839e49f0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 127157 -----Original Message----- From: hickengruendler I think it's even more than that. She does not simply believe, that rules are right, she uses the rules to make her own wrongs right (partly through the Educational Decrees). If she were only a woman who slavishly believes in the rules, than she would never have sent Dementors to "silence" Harry, she would never have tortured school children with that quill, she would never have used her position to humiltate Sybill Trelawney like that. I think she is a major villainess and everything she does is to further hew own personal agenda. She is as evil as Voldemort or Bellatrix; she just couldn't show it as openly, because her aim is not to destroy or fight the wizard society, but to raise to power by (seemingly) legal means. The rules are just a tool for her. -------------------------- Jaanis: Taking all this into consideration, isn't it funny that we find out about Umbridge this late? A woman with such ambitions, attitude and behaviour, being the next official to the Minister of Magic! She must have been a topic among wizards, Weasleys or Hogwart's professors and students, for example. Especially if she's been so ill-disposed to the current administration at Hogwarts. Or if she hasn't, why did she suddenly became such? Had she got some kind of pressure?... From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Apr 5 23:23:58 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 23:23:58 -0000 Subject: Is Umbridge on the side of good or bad? In-Reply-To: <000001c53a2f$839e49f0$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127158 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "JaanisE" wrote: > -------------------------- > > Jaanis: > > Taking all this into consideration, isn't it funny that we find out > about Umbridge this late? A woman with such ambitions, attitude and > behaviour, being the next official to the Minister of Magic! She must > have been a topic among wizards, Weasleys or Hogwart's professors and > students, for example. Especially if she's been so ill-disposed to the > current administration at Hogwarts. Or if she hasn't, why did she > suddenly became such? Had she got some kind of pressure?... Hickengruendler: IMO, she is now ill-disposed to Dumbledore because Fudge is. As long as Fudge and Dumbledore were on friendly terms, Umbridge is no threat, since she wants to be in the Minister's good grace. But now, that Albus and Cornelius have broken, Umbridge became an enemie, because she wanted to demonstrate Fudge her loyality. (Not that I think she is really loyal to Fudge, but she wanted him to think so). But she went further than Fudge, because now she is openly on his side, therefore she knew that if Harry and Dumbledore turned out right in the end, her power is threatened. Only as long as Fudge has the say, she is safe (at least for that moment, I don't doubt that she would have used an opportunity to overpower Fudge, if it were given to her). I don't think she ever cared if Harry spoke the truth, she just wanted to make sure nobody listens to him. Hickengruendler From dk59us at yahoo.com Tue Apr 5 23:51:35 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2005 23:51:35 -0000 Subject: Umbridge's goal calling in Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127159 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > >Or as Senior Undersecretary to the Minister, was she aware that the > > Potter boy had already survived at least one Kiss attempt from a > swarm > > of Dementors and was in fact capable of producing a corporeal > Patronus > > that would be sufficient to ward off two Dementors? Grey Wolf wrote: > I have to wonder, however, how the Senior Undersecretary to the > Minister - or even the Minister himself - would know, at the time > the order was issued, that Harry could succesfully produce a > corporal Patronus strong enough to ward off two dementors. The > fact is that Harry's ability wasn't out in the open until after the > attack at the start of OotP, unless you count the time when Harry > "patronused" Malfoy & co. at the quidditch match, and the time > Harry "patronused" a boggart during the third task of the > Triwiward Tournament. Neither reflect the reality of a true > Dementor attack - in particular, how much harder it is to generate > happy thoughts when the Dementors are busy drawing all heat > and light and happiness from the very air. > > Remember that Harry's best patronus, at the lake, was witnessed by > none but the Dementors and Harry himself. During the > conversations following the scene, Snape cannot (or doesn't want > to) tell the Minister that a Patronus was what saved them, much less > that it was Harry the one that did it. Eustace_Scrubb again: There are no _human_ witnesses, true. But the Dementors presumably saw it, as you point out, and I'm sure they know a Patronus when they see one. Ministry officials apparently are able to communicate with the Dementors, though we've not seen that interaction in the texts. Then again, they may not have noticed or understood that the Patronus was cast by the same person they were attacking, since two Harrys were present at that time. Hmmmm... Cheers Eustace_Scrubb From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Apr 6 00:31:38 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 00:31:38 -0000 Subject: My predictions in April 2003 In-Reply-To: <20050405205741.12324.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127160 > Hans: > This is what I predicted in April 2003 what was coming in future > books, and I was very happy to see many of my predictions verified > even as early as book 5. > > > Book 6 will deal with the liberation of the emotional-I in the heart. ...edited... As Lily symbolises the eternal spark of the Spirit in the heart I suspect her body is in that room, being "studied" by the unspeakables. > Valky: That's one way of looking at it, Hans. But I have been suspecting that Lily is/was not the one being studied, but that the room is the place where she herself studied. That might also explain how she knew the powerful countercurse (sacrifice/love) that she used to save Harry in Godrics Hollow and how she managed to infuse Harry's skin with her motherly love and protection. Also, I have thought that perhaps whatever spell protection that made the door to this room impossible to open was created by Lily, and that the key into the room was her Eyes, which Harry has. Maybe this is a MOM secret that Percy will share with Harry when they become closer friends in the next book, which I am certain will happen. From HP5Freak at aol.com Wed Apr 6 01:12:31 2005 From: HP5Freak at aol.com (HP5Freak at aol.com) Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 21:12:31 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Turban Dream Message-ID: <1c1.25b24caf.2f84917f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127161 In a message dated 4/4/2005 3:13:39 AM Central Daylight Time, finwitch at yahoo.com writes: > > Steve: > > > >Don't you find it odd that the author would give us, the reader, > >insight into such a strange dream, but not allow the character to > >remember it. > > > >I guess on one hand, that's not that uncommon, all of us frequently > >wake from dream, and the memory of those dreams quickly fade from out > >mind. So, it may have been nothing more than that. > > > >But still... it seems odd. > > Finwitch: > > It does indeed. Harry also begins to forget many of his scar-brought > dreams... And there's the caged dream at the beginning of CoS. Both > show what's going on, but the Turban-dream was obscure. What of the > Flying Motorcycle - a dream Harry DID remember? Was it a dream OR a > memory of his Flight to the 4 Privet Drive - as well as predicting > Hagrid's arrival later? > > This dream-issue follows up with the Divination. Tea-leaves. (Harry's > prediction was correct; it came true when Ron got his 'Scabbers back') > - but particularly Trelawney's issued homework: Dream Diary. > > We might also remember that most of Harry's visions - those of > Voldemort, with his scar hurting - have been TRUE. > > Amberlyn: I am in the middle of reading book four right now (my book club is doing an 18 month discussion on the book), and I noticed something about Harry's dreams as well, since we are speaking of dreams he doesn't remember... In the very beginning of GoF, Harry has the dream of what happens to Frank Bryce. Now, Bertha Jorkins name is mentioned in this scene. Yet, when Harry hears that name later, from Percy, Arthur, Bagman, Dumbledore, etc., he doesn't recall the name at all. I think it is when Harry DOESN'T remember dreams, or parts of them, that it is a clue to the ending. As with the turban talking to him (presumably Voldemort in Quirrell's turban), Harry never remembers it, and therefore, it holds a major clue to the story. Imagine if Harry recalled the name from the dream and said something to Dumbledore about it, "Um, yeah, Professor Dumbledore, I had this dream about Voldemort and Wormtail and they admitting to killing Bertha Jorkins...so you'd better tell Mr Bagman or Mr. Crouch, right away. Oh, and that muggle you mentioned, Frank Bryce? He's dead too. That's what woke me up. This is bad news" Just a thought...... Amberlyn, who sinks to the bottom of the lurking depths to avoid howlers from the elves...and promptly gets attacked by grindylows... > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net Wed Apr 6 02:24:59 2005 From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Richard Jones) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:24:59 -0000 Subject: Mixing the Magical and Muggle Worlds Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127162 I'm confused by the apparent lack of knowledge of the Muggle world by witches and wizards. In the first book, it says that "loads of" students come from the Muggle families. So any witch or wizard who went to Hogwarts should know stuff about them. Like how to dress like a Muggle. Also there is only one "all magic" town in Britain (Hogsmeade); the rest live in London or wherever and so they should know how Muggles dress. And Ron has "trainers" (sneakers). The magical world has at least one train and one bus, a flying motorcycle, a flying car, the Ministry has other cars, and yet Arthur ? head of the Muggle department ? keeps making elementary mistakes about technology. Shaklebolt miscalls "firearms" "firelegs" and yet Hagrid knew what the Dursleys' shotgun was. And why didn't Harry or Hermione or some other Muggle-born ever bring a pen to school? I know it is fun the way JKR is mixing things up, but there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to it all. Richard Jones From bob.oliver at cox.net Wed Apr 6 04:06:53 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 04:06:53 -0000 Subject: Whither Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127163 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > ROWLING ON SNAPE > > I probably have a tendency to soften Snape's character a little too much, looking > forward to what he might become if some of his rough edges are ever polished. And > Rowling's comments don't encourage one to think they will be. But it strikes me that > some of Rowling's comments on Snape might be a trifle disingenuous - - when she > seems to be mystified at why people like him or nonplussed by some of the theories. > If she followed the fandom closely enough to know that people were spinning wild > theories about Mark Evans, surely the much larger body of speculation about Snape > could not have escaped her notice? Well, I think that's the point. I think JKR DOES know about all the speculation concerning Snape. I don't think the speculation per se is what she expressed amazement at. After all, she herself has said he is a fascinating character and a pleasure to write. But the question of speculation and interest is VERY different from the question of seeing Snape as a positive figure. I think the latter is what JKR is reacting to. It doesn't really strike me as disingenuous. I think she is honestly puzzled as to why so many people see so many positive traits in Snape. Now, I think it is also a little bit of overkill to say that she sees NO positive traits in him (and I realize the above post does not claim that). She has said he has "latent good qualities." But she has also called him a "horrible" and "sadistic" person who "abuses his power." I suspect she wonders why so many people (in her opinion) inflate Snape's good qualities (which remember, are latent) well out of proportion while severely downplaying the negative aspects to the character. Also I suspect she may be somewhat puzzled by the whole "nice vs. good" debate. Along with nrenka, I hold that canon as we have it implies no such thing. Indeed, canon (and especially OOTP) holds that "niceness" is indeed a very important aspect of "goodness." Thus, when she says we shouldn't think Snape is too "nice" and people then argue that she isn't saying he isn't too "good," I think they are implying a rigid differentiation of concepts that she doesn't see. In other words, I think she was implying that Snape isn't too "good," and is mystified as to why that message doesn't seem to be getting across. > > SNAPE'S FATE > I think Snape is going to have to make some of the choices I listed above, > positively, I hope. His anger and his distrust of Harry may hinder him, but if there's > a disaster it will probably be brought on more by Harry's unjust anger and inability to > let go of a grudge than Snape's. At the end of OOP, Harry was blaming Snape for > Sirius's death in much the same way that Snape seems to blame Sirius for luring him > into the werewolf's lair. And Harry has told himself that he's never, ever going to > forgive. > > Pippin But JKR has already done this with Harry. Much of the problem in OOTP came from his inability to trust Snape, and he practically admits as much to himself in Dumbledore's office -- going so far as to see his anger at Snape as a defense. That of course doesn't make it any less real. But to go through yet another example of how Harry's distrust of Snape causes problems wouldn't accomplish much for plot or character. For SNAPE, on the other hand, to be the instigator of disaster WOULD bring a lot to the table for plot and characterization. It would probably finally force DD to come completely clear about his history with Snape, and thus further develop both his character and Severus', as well as clearing up lingering questions about the Marauders. Lupinlore From hambtty at triad.rr.com Wed Apr 6 00:44:49 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 00:44:49 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127164 Chancie: > It just strikes me kind of odd that JKR mentioned that it was > owned by someone who never went there, wouldn't it have been > easier to just say that it was abandoned, if it weren't to come > in to play later on? > > Any thoughts? GEO: If it was made abandoned as you suggested then who would have been paying Frank to maintain and watch over the grounds of the house? BG: Dumbledore paid Frank to maintain the house and Harry Potter owns it. I can't quite figure out the details but I'm convinced that Harry is the "mirror image" of Tom - not related him but, him. Harry is reliving Tom's life - THE PLAN DD speaks of in OOTP. Harry is remolding Tom's fate by making wiser choices for him when faced with similar circumstances. What sparked my theory? This quote from an article I found online about the real Nicolas Flamel. The quote is from Magicians, Seers, and Mystics by Reginald Merton. "Nicolas Flamel had developed in himself sufficient wisdom and strength to hold out against the storm of light involved by the coming of truth to the heart of man. Only then did events group themselves harmoniously according to his will and allow him to realize his desire." Now, this is my avorite: "For everything good and great that happens to a man is the result of the co-ordination of his own voluntary effort and a malleable fate." In essence DD is arranging for Tom to get a "Do Over" to save the WW. We have read how Tom and Harry have many similar experiences with the difference being their choices. In Books 6 & 7 we'll find out more as she reveals TR/LV's full history and what role Lily and James Potter played in THE PLAN to stop him. There will twists and turns but JKR will bring us full circle (remember the time turner?) and I hope we are ready for the conclusion. From WNCMegs at aol.com Wed Apr 6 02:49:04 2005 From: WNCMegs at aol.com (Megan) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 02:49:04 -0000 Subject: Mixing the Magical and Muggle Worlds In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127165 Richard wrote: > I'm confused by the apparent lack of knowledge of the Muggle > world by witches and wizards. > > In the first book, it says that "loads of" students come from > the Muggle families. So any witch or wizard who went to > Hogwarts should know stuff about them. Like how to dress like > a Muggle. > > The magical world has at least one train and one bus, a flying > motorcycle, a flying car, the Ministry has other cars, and yet > Arthur ? head of the Muggle department ? keeps making elementary > mistakes about technology. > > Shaklebolt miscalls "firearms" "firelegs" and yet Hagrid knew > what the Dursleys' shotgun was. Megan: I have had the same thoughts. Arther WORKS in the Misuse of Muggle Artifacts Office and should therefore know SOMETHING about Muggle life. They all dress in Muggle clothes from time to time and how do they do get the items? Maybe there is a Wizard who has a shop selling Muggle Clothes. This could explain why some Wizards own Muggle Clothing and do not realize it is the RIGHT Muggle clothes (remember the insident at the Quidditch World Cup?) Some Wizards may choose to NEVER learn about Muggles. I too find it amazing that most Wizards are clueless about it. I think Shackbolt knew the correct term, however, and used the wrong term to stall time to talk to Arthur. Muggles seem to be seen as "below" Wizards and this may be another reason why Wizards do not understand or care to understand and learn about them. Just a thought! From mfterman at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 03:38:46 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 03:38:46 -0000 Subject: Mixing the Magical and Muggle Worlds In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127166 It's fairly simple, JKR is not trying to build a coherent and logical world where magic forms an alternate technology of sorts and you have a realistic scenario of what would really happen if wizards were closeted within the Muggle world. She's writing everything with maximum entertainment value (OWLs, NEWTs, Floo network, broomsticks, witches and wizards wearing robes and pointy hats, etc.). A good question becomes where do the Weasleys get their food and other basic goods from? Do they go all the way down to Diagon Alley for basic goods like food or do they go to a local supermarket? Why is the Burrow all out by itself? Why is there only one wizarding village in all of England? Why wouldn't all of the English wizards be tending to cluster together in Unplottable wizarding villages in the remote English countryside? Don't get me started on how realistic Harry's classes are at Hogwarts, or the idea that there is no wizarding equivalent of a university. The fact is that JKR does things that are entertaining, and plausibility and consistancy is a distant second. She rarely thinks about the full implications of what she tosses in (such as making sure all the fireplaces have a locking grating on them so burglars can't get in via the floo network). mfterman From rosie_27018 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 03:49:45 2005 From: rosie_27018 at yahoo.com (Ann Crutchley) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 03:49:45 -0000 Subject: My predictions in April 2003 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127167 > > Hans: > > As Lily symbolises the eternal spark of the Spirit in the > > heart I suspect her body is in that room, being "studied" > > by the unspeakables. > > Valky: > That's one way of looking at it, Hans. But I have been > suspecting that Lily is/was not the one being studied, but > that the room is the place where she herself studied. > > That might also explain how she knew the powerful countercurse > (sacrifice/love) that she used to save Harry in Godrics Hollow > and how she managed to infuse Harry's skin with her motherly > love and protection. I understand what both of ya are saying, but for one moment have you ever just thought that Lily just loved her child? And just natural love gave Harry the protection? Of course, I'm sure Dumbledore has studied the old magic and knew how to protect Harry growing up but really, come on, any woman who has children knows that because they love their child they'll do anything to protect them; it's in our nature. You hear of it all the time, mothers going beyond the call of duty to save their child. Why does it have to be complicated? It's really simple - a love between mother and child is magical all in itself. Ann From rosie_27018 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 04:01:23 2005 From: rosie_27018 at yahoo.com (Ann Crutchley) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 04:01:23 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127168 mfterman wrote: > My own feeling is that Voldemort bought it a while back through > some Muggle proxies. I think the idea of owning the Riddle estate > appealed to him. Remember that he killed the family back in 1945. > It's not like he hasn't had plenty of time to purchase it. That's > why he was so comfortable using it as a base of operations. Why would Voldemort buy a house? He's the most feared wizard of all time. He just took it over; if you recall, the towns people said that it never stayed lived in because of the events of the night the Riddles were killed. And if he bought the house then why didn't Frank Bryce know about it? He could have used a memory charm on him or use magic to make the people forget it was there - like make it unplottable like Sirius's house and Hogwarts etc.. If you're evil why would you do something law abiding? He knows the towns people wouldn't bother him. It was just unfornate for Frank. I'm sure if Voldemort would have been stronger and had not just arrived he would have taken care of Frank sooner. Ann From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 05:04:47 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 05:04:47 -0000 Subject: Mixing the Magical and Muggle Worlds Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127169 Richard Jones said: > I'm confused by the apparent lack of knowledge of the Muggle world > by witches and wizards. I think the WW is as oblivious of the Muggles as the Muggles are of the WW. Maybe they (we?) are all going around with our heads in the sand. :) Bonnie - who wants a WW car to drive to work in. From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 05:24:28 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 05:24:28 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127170 Deborah: > How's your Philip Pullman? Chys: Never read him. Deborah: > Remember that Lyra's mother, a morally ambiguous character in > spades until the end (presumably ...), has a monkey for a daimon, > and the authorial comment is that it is apparently incredible but > true that the woman and the ape (sorry - wrong book!) should be > the same, but they are. Chys: Well, that makes sense. I was thinking more of the asian wise monkey; like he's older than his time- even if he is still a small, insignificant-seeming creature. Then there's the chance he won't have an animagus form. Deborah: > A good way to resolve it would of course be to see MM's Patronus; > if it's a kitty, or a sabre-toothed tiger, then QED. Chys: LOL, that could be, I would really want to see now. Deborah: > I've been puzzled about Harry's Patronus - the way people kept > on nailing Sirius for thinking that Harry was a rerun of James > instead of his own person in his own time, but they do seem to > be identical on that very intimate level. Where does Lily come > in? Chys: Sirius, maybe everyone just assumes he's still stuck in the past since his traumatic experience in Azkaban. Lily.... well, being redundant- The eyes, somehow. I think Harry is more like his elder version of James. James, once he had matured, is like Harry, not just in appearance, but Harry can be fiery like his mom too. He's kind of got an old soul, (or it could be a result of his stay with the Dursleys, his being more mature in some ways than some of the other students,) but not much real-life experience to back it up. That's why I thought monkey, initially, would be cute and reflective. (Plus the jokes wouldn't be too bad. ^^) Deborah: > Someone imagined her Patronus as a dove; I've always imagined > something like a hawk or a kestrel, not sure why. Oh well, > perhaps in HBP the answers they do lurk! Chys: Notice they all have wings? Why not a bear? I agree with you there though, kestral or an owl, which is common for wizards, but it's all symbolism. What animal is a good defender, aside from a dog? I can see her as a shield for Harry. -Chys. From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 05:54:04 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 05:54:04 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127171 > Sherrie here: > If your theory is true (and I think it very well may be), then > Cho's swan is a definite red flag - swans may be beautiful, but > they're MEAN. So are geese. Cho can be mean on the Quidditch field, can't she? Ah, she's mean to Harry too, maybe in that misunderstood way that girls have. Maybe JKR didn't think of that, or Cho has more depth than we give her credit for? Chys From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 06:42:10 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 06:42:10 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house...? - Likely Candidates In-Reply-To: <8c.245ad368.2f845eb0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127172 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: > ...edited... > > But my question is, does anyone think the current owner of the > Riddle house is important? Or have any guesses as to who > he/she is? ...edtied... > > Any thoughts? > > Chancie bboyminn: As Grey Wolf already pointed out, in previous discussion the most popular opinions went to Dumbledore and Lucius Malfoy. At various times I have argued for both; well, one or the other, not both at the same time. I even futher speculated the Malfoy might simply be fronting for Voldemort. That is, Malfoy used his money to purchase the Riddle Mansion on Tom/Voldemort's behalf. One of my other arguments is that after Tom Riddle left school, he had very few resources; he was an orphan. However, there was one available resource that he could get his hands on and use it to finance his 'transformation' in to Voldemort. That resource was the Riddle Family Estate. When Tom killed his father and grandparents, as far as we know, he wiped out the House of Riddle. So who inherited the house, land, and money? It had to go somewhere. Minus a true heir, the estate would have been dispursed to minor and distant relatives of the Riddle family, which would have essentially dissolved the fortune. Lately, I've been thinking maybe Voldemort came back to Little Hangleton, or perhaps to the authorities in Greater Hangleton, and laid his claim to the estate. He waited long enough that there would be no obvious connection between himself and the deaths. I also, consider that he may have done this through proxies. By that I mean he may have sent some lawyers to act on his behalf to give evidence that there really was a young Tom Riddle Jr who had valid and legal claim to the estate. By sending lawyers to represent him, Tom could have avoided any nasty connection between himself and the dark hair teenage boy that Frank saw lurking about. At that time, he sold the house and used the money to finance his research into the Dark Arts and into immortality. Later, after he returned as Voldemort and started to gain power, I also assume that along with power and followers, he gained wealth. Using this wealth, he re-purchased the Riddle Mansion, and continued to pay Frank to be the caretake. Again, this was not handled by him personally, but by a solicitors (minor low grade lawyers), he hired to manage his muggle property and money, and pay the taxes and Frank. My guess is, he thought it could come in handy as a hide-out, or a quiet country house when he needed to get away from the daily grind of ruling the world. So, I think between this and what Grey Wolf said, you have the most popular theories... Dumbledore - knowing that Tom Riddle (alias Voldemort) was a significant player, he thought it best to control the Riddle Mansion. My personal extension of this is that Dumbledore will give the house to Harry after the final battle; a nice quiet place for him to recover and live out his life. Malfoy - bought it personally knowing it had a connection to Voldemort. Malfoy - bought it specifically acting on Tom Riddle/Voldemort's behalf Tom Riddle/Voldemort - as I have explained above. Joe Richguy - some random insignificant person who need to stash some money in a reasonable investment, so he bought an old mansion for 'Tax Reasons'. Make of it what you will. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 07:23:54 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 07:23:54 -0000 Subject: Mixing the Magical and Muggle Worlds In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127173 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote: > Richard Jones said: > > > I'm confused by the apparent lack of knowledge of the Muggle > > world by witches and wizards. > Bonnie: > > I think the WW is as oblivious of the Muggles as the Muggles are > of the WW. Maybe they (we?) are all going around with our heads in > the sand. :) > > Bonnie - who wants a WW car to drive to work in. bboyminn: If you think about it Bonnie, muggles aren't totally oblivious to wizards and witches. Our history is filled with them, as is our literature and legends (folklore, fairytale, Myths, etc...). Every Holloween we dress up our stores and houses with witches and black cats. In New Orleans there are may magic and VooDoo shops where you can by amulets, potions, and other magic paraphernalia. We see impossible to believe stage magic shows. In a sense magic is all around us, BUT we don't take it seriously. So, in a way, we are aware of the magic world, but as has been implied by more than one wizard in the books, we muggles go to very great length to deny the reality of magic. At the same time, while we think we know about witches, wizards, Goblin, and Ghouls, we see from JKR's books that our view is just about as distorted and the wizards view of the muggle world. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 07:38:53 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 07:38:53 -0000 Subject: Mixing the Magical and Muggle Worlds - LINKS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127174 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard Jones" wrote: > > I'm confused by the apparent lack of knowledge of the Muggle world > by witches and wizards. > > In the first book, it says that "loads of" students come from the > Muggle families. So any witch or wizard who went to Hogwarts should > know stuff about them. Like how to dress like a Muggle. Also there > is only one "all magic" town in Britain (Hogsmeade); the rest live > in London or wherever and so they should know how Muggles dress. > > ...edited... > > And why didn't Harry or Hermione or some other Muggle-born ever > bring a pen to school? > > I know it is fun the way JKR is mixing things up, but there doesn't > seem to be any rhyme or reason to it all. > > Richard Jones bboyminn: Oh what a tangled web we weave when we ask question for which I happen to have a personal Link List. I'm not sure if people like or dislike my link lists, I posted a few recently. For those who don't like it, you are certainly free to ignore the links and discuss the topic. For those who would like to look back at old theories and ideas, feel equally free. You mention that many wizards like the Black family and Moody live right in London, how can they ignore a huge city around them? To this I always respond by pointing out that every big city has somewhat isolated enclaves within their city boundaries; examples, Chinatown, Little Saigon, Little Tokyo, etc.... Many of the people who emigrate to these cities, especially older people, use these enclaves of their own familiar culture to isolate themselves from the new culture they are immersed in. For example, myself and my Korean business partner has dinner with some Korean/Americans in Koreatown-Los Angeles. During the entire evening, our host never spoke a single word of English. Despite his marginal English, he was a successful businessman. Successful because he did all his business in Koreatown, and to a very great extent isolating himself from American culture. Side note; Koreatown-L.A. is 250,000 people; that's bigger than the city of Minneapolis, MN. I won't elaborate beyond what I have said because some of the links go into my 'Chinatown' theory in depth, but it's enough to give you the general idea of how one culture can isolate itself inside of another. Link List - From: "Steve" Date: Wed Dec 4, 2002 11:40 am Subject: Re: Question about wizards and living.... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/47712 -General Discussion of the mixing of Magic and Muggle people. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/47725 -Same thread, but focuses specifically in the Burrow. From: "Steve" Date: Wed Oct 23, 2002 11:53 pm Subject: Robes and other Clothing http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/45724 -focuses mainly on Clothing and Robes From: "Steve " Date: Wed Jan 1, 2003 5:57 pm Subject: Re: Wizard Clothes. Plus Wizard Isolation. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/49071 -Discusses Clothing and touches on my Chinatown Theory. From: "Steve " Date: Fri Jan 24, 2003 11:25 pm Subject: Re: Muggle Questions Was: McGonagall the snoop http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/50557 -Again touches on the Chinatown theory as an analogy to the Wizard World. From: "Steve" Date: Thu Jul 3, 2003 12:19 pm Subject: Re: Why are some poor, others rich in the WW? http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/67108 -Chinetown analogy relating to the necessity of Muggle/Magic interaction. From: "Steve" Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 8:44 am Subject: Re: Food in wizarding world http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/76535 -Open air markets and food in the wizard world. From: "Steve" Date: Tue Aug 26, 2003 1:31 pm Subject: Muggle traditions at Hogwarts? (Was - Re: Religion http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78853 -Wizard transportation, holidays, shopping, and muggle interaction From: "Steve" Date: Tue Aug 26, 2003 4:50 pm Subject: Muggle traditions at Hogwarts? (Was - Re: Religion http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78882 -Christmas in the Wizard World and other overlaps. For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From mfterman at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 07:49:12 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 07:49:12 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127175 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ann Crutchley" wrote: > If you're evil why would you do something law abiding? He knows > the towns people wouldn't bother him. It was just unfornate for > Frank. I'm sure if Voldemort would have been stronger and had not > just arrived he would have taken care of Frank sooner. You know, just because Voldemort is evil doesn't mean he's under this compulsion only to do illegal things. And there were a number of reasons for him to buy the house legally. Among other things, it avoided attention from a number of people, including his own Death Eaters. Remember that very few of them knew that he was once Tom Riddle, a half-blood. And I think part of him would be pleased to be the legal owner of it in some perverse way, to defile the memory of his father. Remember that he was disinherited by his Muggle family, to actually own the property that they cut away from him I think would amuse him. That it was all perfectly legal would make it only more perverse. In fact owning the house is one of the best ways for him to gain vengence on his deceased Muggle ancestors, owning the Riddle mansion and making it his own. That's the main reason I think he's the actual owner of the thing. They try to cut him off and he ends up with all of their things (or at least the significant ones) anyway. mfterman From lebeto033 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 07:58:24 2005 From: lebeto033 at yahoo.com (lebeto033) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 07:58:24 -0000 Subject: Lily's love (was Re: My predictions in April 2003) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127176 > Ann: > I understand what both of ya are saying, but for one moment > have you ever just thought that Lily just loved her child? And > just natural love gave Harry the protection? Of course, I'm sure > Dumbledore has studied the old magic and knew how to protect Harry > growing up but really, come on, any woman who has children knows > that because they love their child they'll do anything to protect > them; it's in our nature. You hear of it all the time, mothers > going beyond the call of duty to save their child. Why does it > have to be complicated? It's really simple - a love between mother > and child is magical all in itself. I always thought that the love answer was sort of a cop out on Dumbledore's part. I doubt that Lily was the only mother who died before her child that loved her child. If her love was the only variable then she was either more powerful than anyone else or loved Harry more than any other mother/child. That's why I assume that Dumbledore was keeping secrets and assumed Harry wasn't mature enough to handle all the information. Because hearing your mom loved you so much that it protected you from the worst curse in existence is a nice thing if you are an unloved orphan. And playing the devil's advocate for the Slytherin Dumbledore, such a statement is a nice way to give a vague answer while also diverting Harry's mind from the question at hand. Beto From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Wed Apr 6 08:39:24 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 08:39:24 -0000 Subject: Umbridge's goal calling in Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127177 Eustace_Scrubb wrote: > Eustace_Scrubb again: > There are no _human_ witnesses, true. But the Dementors presumably > saw it, as you point out, and I'm sure they know a Patronus when they > see one. Ministry officials apparently are able to communicate with > the Dementors, though we've not seen that interaction in the texts. > Then again, they may not have noticed or understood that the Patronus > was cast by the same person they were attacking, since two Harrys were > present at that time. Hmmmm... > > Cheers > > Eustace_Scrubb There are several canon points against the Dementors being witnesses. First and foremost is the fact that they're *blind* and they cannot tell one human from another - remember Crouch Jr. escaping from Azkaban by using polyjuice "for the benefit of the other prisoners". The Azkaban guards could only tell that a sick person and a healthy one were moving around. Apart from the problems for a proper witness in the scene (Harry was on the other side of a (the?) lake, at night), Dementors also are blind and can't tell a human from another and they were being attacked by a Patronus to boot. And that is not even going into the problem of working out that the person attacking you might be the same that's faded out at your feet, only two hours older and having come back in time. All in all, I stand by my claim that - unless there were hidden observers in the scene we know nothing about (and I'd discard that, since the place was packed with Dementors) - no-one saw Harry perform his Patronus at the time. Which of course leaves only the other two I mentioned. In particular, the one during the third task might have clued people into Harry's abilities, but then again, we aren't too sure of how much the people could see of the task. Given that Krum wasn't taken to Azkaban for performing a Cruciatus on Cedric, it could be that no-one saw Harry use the Patronus either. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Wed Apr 6 10:25:42 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 10:25:42 -0000 Subject: Lily's love (was Re: My predictions in April 2003) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127178 Beto wrote: > I always thought that the love answer was sort of a cop out on > Dumbledore's part. I doubt that Lily was the only mother who died > before her child that loved her child. If her love was the only > variable then she was either more powerful than anyone else or > loved Harry more than any other mother/child. That's why I assume > that Dumbledore was keeping secrets and assumed Harry wasn't mature > enough to handle all the information. Because hearing your mom > loved you so much that it protected you from the worst curse in > existence is a nice thing if you are an unloved orphan. And > playing the devil's advocate for the Slytherin Dumbledore, such a > statement is a nice way to give a vague answer while also diverting > Harry's mind from the question at hand. > > Beto I agree - the situation of a mother dying for his child is not so uncommon that Harry's Love Shield should be a product of only it. Mind you, from what we see in the books AK might be a particularly rare curse, but if the Love Shield only protects you from an AK, it would be a rather useless thing. No, I have thought for a while that James and Lily were investigating ancient magics to help DUmbledore in the Voldemort War, and that Lily's focus in particular might have been in the power of love, or maybe family, as a way to protect people. IIRC, my theory went that a sacrifice was required, in particular a willing sacrifice of someone who loved the recipient. Essentially, that would turn Lily's Love Shield into a much harder to reproduce situation - acombination of love, knowledge of ancient magics and the unlikely situation of a sacrifice. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Wed Apr 6 11:11:39 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 19:11:39 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bending the rules in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <1112743459.20526.47760.m18@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112743459.20526.47760.m18@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127179 I was thinking about the tendency of Arthur Weasley to indulge in rule bending. There's borrowing the car from work without permission and there's having Ludo Bagman give his tickets to the quidditch cup. Any other examples? Emma From meriaugust at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 12:34:29 2005 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:34:29 -0000 Subject: Bending the rules in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127180 Emma Hawkes wrote: > I was thinking about the tendency of Arthur Weasley to indulge in > rule bending. There's borrowing the car from work without permission > and there's having Ludo Bagman give his tickets to the quidditch cup. > Any other examples? Meri now, posting quickly after a long sabatical: Was his borrowing the car from work without permission? I assume you're talking about PoA where he and the other Weasleys escorted Harry to King's Cross? I'm pretty sure he called in a favor for those to keep Harry safe from Sirius. And I think he did the same thing (calling in a favor) to get the Quidditch Cup tickets (IIRC he helped Ludo's brother Otto out with some weird ferrets). So that's not bending the rules per se. But his tinkering with the Ford Anglia is certainly extra-legal. Meri From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 6 13:03:15 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:03:15 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house...? - Likely Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127181 >chancie wrote: > > But my question is, does anyone think the current owner of the > > Riddle house is important? Or have any guesses as to who > > he/she is? ...edtied... > > > > Any thoughts? > bboyminn wrote: > > So, I think between this and what Grey Wolf said, you have the most > popular theories... > > Dumbledore - knowing that Tom Riddle (alias Voldemort) was a > significant player, he thought it best to control the Riddle Mansion. > My personal extension of this is that Dumbledore will give the house > to Harry after the final battle; a nice quiet place for him to recover > and live out his life. > > Malfoy - bought it personally knowing it had a connection to Voldemort. > > Malfoy - bought it specifically acting on Tom Riddle/Voldemort's behalf > > Tom Riddle/Voldemort - as I have explained above. > > Joe Richguy - some random insignificant person who need to stash some > money in a reasonable investment, so he bought an old mansion for 'Tax > Reasons'. Hannah: I'm going with 'Joe Richguy.' It's not often I take something in canon at face value, but on this, I do. If Dumbledore owned the house, then how come he didn't have more idea about the uses it was being put to, especially as the evidence built up over the year that LV was gaining in strength - and given that he knew Bryce had been killed. With the Malfoys, I don't see why they'd have employed a Muggle gardner, and what purpose owning the house would serve them. They didn't know LV was going to return. If they bought it before LV's downfall on his behalf, again, why did they keep it up and continue to pay Frank Bryce? I don't believe that Riddle owned it either. If he owned the house, how had he managed to keep paying Frank for the thirteen years he'd been Vapour!Mort? I don't think he'd risk exposure like that. My guess is that he needed somewhere to stay near the graveyard, found the house to be empty, and moved on in. If people had been living there/ stumbled upon him, as Frank did, he just killed them. So unless Dumbledore or Malfoy or Riddle has purchased it since the end of GoF (possible for DD, probably not for the others), I'm guessing it's insignificant. Hannah From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Apr 6 13:19:34 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:19:34 -0000 Subject: Lily's love (was Re: My predictions in April 2003) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127182 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" wrote: > I have thought for a while that James > and Lily were investigating ancient magics to help DUmbledore in the > Voldemort War, and that Lily's focus in particular might have been in > the power of love, or maybe family, as a way to protect people. IIRC, > my theory went that a sacrifice was required, in particular a willing > sacrifice of someone who loved the recipient. > > Essentially, that would turn Lily's Love Shield into a much harder to > reproduce situation - acombination of love, knowledge of ancient > magics and the unlikely situation of a sacrifice. > > Hope that helps, > > Grey Wolf Valky: Thanks Grey Wolf, for up til now I wholly agreed with that. But for some reason looking at it now from this distance I can understand how a planned Love charm can appear to "cheapen" it all, if you can in any way cheapen a sacrifice (bad choice of words I suppose but I am stuck for alternatives here). What I mean is that in comparing the the *other* symbolic sacrifices in the books it just seems to be missing an element. I suppose I am really kind of fond of viewing Lily's sacrifice as an *absolute* act of hope, which would mean it couldn't very well have been an outrightly planned move. So I think that Lily had been studying the ancient magics, and was particularly interested in Love, but she didn't intellectually choose a loving sacrifice to save her child. Instead she in one amazing moment gave everything she had for one small miracle. That may be a mothers love, in many atypical ways, but I think that it is more transcendental than that. Though a mother's love is the closest analogy to it. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 13:18:56 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:18:56 -0000 Subject: Lily's love (was Re: My predictions in April 2003) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127183 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lebeto033" wrote: > I always thought that the love answer was sort of a cop out on > Dumbledore's part. I doubt that Lily was the only mother who died > before her child that loved her child. If her love was the only > variable then she was either more powerful than anyone else or > loved Harry more than any other mother/child. GEO: I agree, it wasn't just Lily's sacrificial and maternal love that allowed Harry to survive the AK curse from Voldemort since as you yourself said this kind of situation is probably all too common , but possibly also the fact that Voldemort was actually willing to spare Lily and that she still sacrificed herself for her son despite the fact that she could have survived was why the maternal protection was activated as glimpsed in the flashbacks in PoA and the finale scene in PS/SS. That's why I assume > that Dumbledore was keeping secrets and assumed Harry wasn't mature > enough to handle all the information. GEO: Or perhaps more likely DD doesn't know the entire mechanism for the maternal protection. Remember of the wizards well versed in magic only Voldemort was there as witness and victim to the protection. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Apr 6 13:36:10 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:36:10 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127184 Lupinlore wrote, in 127032: >>>4) DANGEROUSLY TWISTED SNAPE: In this variant, Snape will remain loyal to Dumbledore, but his inability to put aside his grudges will lead to disaster. Some see the failure of Occlumency in OOTP as a foreshadowing. Others think that the problems arising from Harry's inability to trust Snape in OOTP will be mirrored by disaster arising from Snape's inability to trust Harry in later books. Personally, I think this is the most plausible direction for the Potions Master. Certainly their has been a lot of groundwork laid for such a development.<<< Pippin wrote, in 127136: >> SNAPE'S FATE I think Snape is going to have to make some of the choices I listed above, positively, I hope. His anger and his distrust of Harry may hinder him, but if there's a disaster it will probably be brought on more by Harry's unjust anger and inability to let go of a grudge than Snape's. At the end of OOP, Harry was blaming Snape for Sirius's death in much the same way that Snape seems to blame Sirius for luring him into the werewolf's lair. And Harry has told himself that he's never, ever going to forgive.<< LL replied in 127163: > But JKR has already done this with Harry. Much of the problem in > OOTP came from his inability to trust Snape, and he practically > admits as much to himself in Dumbledore's office -- going so far as > to see his anger at Snape as a defense. That of course doesn't make > it any less real. But to go through yet another example of how > Harry's distrust of Snape causes problems wouldn't accomplish much > for plot or character. > For SNAPE, on the other hand, to be the instigator of disaster WOULD > bring a lot to the table for plot and characterization. It would > probably finally force DD to come completely clear about his history > with Snape, and thus further develop both his character and > Severus', as well as clearing up lingering questions about the > Marauders. SSSusan now: I realize that what I am going to write about borders on what many see as folly ? the application of a RL principle to a fictional character. But in this case, that RL construct seems to fit so completely, that I can't set it aside. Because of it, I think that LL's Option #4 for Snape's future is the most likely of the 5 he presented. It also accounts for why ? while *not* discounting Pippin's suggested possibility of Harry's mistrust & anger causing a problem before we're through ? I think LL is correct that Snape will be the one more likely to struggle with his (what I'd call) "grudge demons" than Harry as we move through year 6 and into year 7. All of this, for me, builds upon something Mooseming wrote concerning Arrogant!Snape in 125115. In struggling to understand that question asked here a billion times ? "Why CAN'T Snape let go of that grudge?" ? as well as a question asked a few less times -- "Why doesn't Snape try harder to teach Harry curricular & extracurricular vital information if he does understand Harry's importance to the cause?" ? I came to a "Eureka!" moment when reading Mooseming's comments on Snape's arrogance. In thinking further & doing some reading on this, I've decided that what we have here is a truly classic case of Narcissism or... Narcissistic!Snape. Bear with me here, but what follows is an excerpt from a chapter in the book _The Social Psychology of Good and Evil_ / ed. by Arthur G. Miller. It's lengthy, but if you have an interest in understanding Snape, it's worth the read. ******************************************************* "Narcissists have exaggeratedly positive or inflated, yet fragile, self-views (Raskin & Terry, 1988). Studies suggest that narcissists' unstable self-esteem stems from their extremely positive self-views, coupled with extreme fears of being found worthless (Morf & Rhodewalt, 2001). When their fragile self-esteem is threatened, narcissists may easily be triggered into protecting, maintaining & enhancing their self-esteem, often at the expense of others. In order to sustain their exaggeratedly positive self-views, narcissists constantly seek external self-validation in the form of attention & admiration from others (Rhodewalt & Morf, 1995). Consequently, their self-views can be easily challenged by external agents or events. Consistent with this view, narcissists' self-esteem fluctuates from day to day in response to whether their social interactions are positive or negative (Rhodewalt et al., 1998). When threatened, narcissists respond with intensely negative emotions.... Furthermore, narcissists respond to ego threat with aggression against others (Baumeister et al., 2000). For example, Bushman & Baumeister (1998) conducted a study in which participants had the opportunity to aggress against someone who had insulted them, someone who had praised them, or against a neutral third person. They found that the combination of high self-esteem, narcissism & insult resulted in the highest levels of aggression; high levels of narcissism predicted increased aggression, especially in instances when negative feedback was received. Building on this research, Kirkpatrick & colleagues identified narcissism as a significant, positive predictor of aggression when these subjects were placed in conditions of ego threat. Narcissistic tendencies are also linked to bullying behavior. Salmivalli (2001) reports that bullying behavior is most typical of adolescent boys who have a "defensive" style of self-expression, defined as needing to be the center of attention, thinking too highly of oneself, and demonstrating inability in facing criticism. In sum, research suggests that narcissists tend to focus more on the self and on protecting their fragile self-esteem than on relating to others or enhancing the quality of their relationships with others. When narcissists experience an ego threat, they are likely to react with anger, hostility and aggression toward others. This reaction may temporarily relieve anxiety but ultimately deter them from building close, mutually caring & supportive relationships with others. Even in the absence of ego threat, narcissists tend to focus more on self-enhancement than on their relationships. For example, although both narcissists & high self-esteem people see themselves as better than average on agential traits such as intellectual ability, narcissists do not believe that they are better than average on communal traits such as agreeableness or morality (Campbell, Rudich & Sedikedes, 2002). Unlike high self-esteem individuals, narcissists tend to endorse more external contingencies of self-worth, such as appearance and outdoing others in competition (Crocker, Luhtanen, Cooper & Bouvrette, in press), consistent with their insatiable need for external validation and admiration from others (Morf, 1994). "The Pursuit of Self-Esteem" by Jennifer Crocker, Shawna J. Lee, Lora E. Park (pp. 284-5). ****************************************************** Susan again: I am most intrigued by the comments about bullying, lack of ability on *communal* traits such as agreeableness [hee!], and the seeking of external self-validation (Order of Merlin, anyone?). Granted that we have little insight into adolescent Snape, so we can't be certain whether the typical adolescent manifestations of narcissism were present for him, but they certainly don't seem OoC from what we do know and from adult Snape's behavior. JKR has described Snape as "deeply horrible," "sadistic," and one who abuses his power. Many HPfGUers see him as a classic bully. And even many of those who see him more in the role of classic schoolmaster than bully do acknowledge that his behavior w/ Harry, Neville & occasionally Hermione is cruel or excessive. Wouldn't a narcissistic Snape explain a *lot* about his inability to tolerate "dunderheads," his annoyance with know-it-all Hermione, his snarky put-downs of others? For everyone who is *lesser* than he in ability actually builds him up, and anyone who is *equal* to or *greater* than him in ability, challenges him uncomfortably. To have to encounter a Harry Potter who reminds Snape of James and James' legacy & shenanigans (including the impression that James was smarter & better than others, that he & Sirius tried to kill Snape, and that they humiliated Snape in front of his peers) would be difficult for many but nearly impossible to bear for the narcissist because of what it does to the ego and self-esteem. But to also have to encounter a Harry Potter who is apparently destined to do what he, Snape, CANNOT (i.e., defeat Voldemort) just doesn't fit cognitively with what Snape needs and can bear. He's not done struggling, that man. Siriusly Snapey Susan From sophierom at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 13:36:50 2005 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:36:50 -0000 Subject: Bending the rules in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Emma Hawkes wrote: > > I was thinking about the tendency of Arthur Weasley to indulge in > rule bending. There's borrowing the car from work without permission > and there's having Ludo Bagman give his tickets to the quidditch cup. > Any other examples? > > Emma Sophie: In GoF, Arthur also hooks the Durlseys up to the Floo Network. GoF, Am. Ed., p. 45: Arthur: "I had your fireplace connected to the Floo Network, you see - just for an afternoon, you know, so we could get Harry. Muggle fireplaces aren't spposed to be connected, stritcly speaking - but I've got a useful contact at the Floor Regulation Panel and he fixed it for me." For all of Percy's complaints about Arthur's dead-end career in Muggle Relations, Arthur sure has quite a few Ministry connections, doesn't he? :-D From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 13:56:00 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 13:56:00 -0000 Subject: Lily's love (was Re: My predictions in April 2003) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127186 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" wrote: > I agree - the situation of a mother dying for his child is not so > uncommon that Harry's Love Shield should be a product of only it. Mind > you, from what we see in the books AK might be a particularly rare > curse, but if the Love Shield only protects you from an AK, it would > be a rather useless thing. GEO: It doesn't just protect again AK, but also from Voldemort himself and those that possessed by him. Look at what happened to Quirrel in PS/SS when he tried to touch Harry in the end so it's probably a very useful charm. > > Essentially, that would turn Lily's Love Shield into a much harder to > reproduce situation - acombination of love, knowledge of ancient > magics and the unlikely situation of a sacrifice. GEO: I disagree even Voldemort himself who knew about the maternal protection and its properties said Lily activated it unwittingly and though he is the central antagonist and Dark Lord, in his moments of exposition and as Rowling's mouthpiece he usually doesn't lie. From naama_gat at hotmail.com Wed Apr 6 14:00:42 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 14:00:42 -0000 Subject: Whither Harry? (was Re: Whither Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127187 Pippin: I think Snape is going to have to make some of the choices I listed above, positively, I hope. His anger and his distrust of Harry may hinder him, but if there's a disaster it will probably be brought on more by Harry's unjust anger and inability to let go of a grudge than Snape's. At the end of OOP, Harry was blaming Snape for Sirius's death in much the same way that Snape seems to blame Sirius for luring him into the werewolf's lair. And Harry has told himself that he's never, ever going to forgive. Lupinlore: But JKR has already done this with Harry. Much of the problem in OOTP came from his inability to trust Snape, and he practically admits as much to himself in Dumbledore's office -- going so far as to see his anger at Snape as a defense. That of course doesn't make it any less real. But to go through yet another example of how Harry's distrust of Snape causes problems wouldn't accomplish much for plot or character. For SNAPE, on the other hand, to be the instigator of disaster WOULD bring a lot to the table for plot and characterization. It would probably finally force DD to come completely clear about his history with Snape, and thus further develop both his character and Severus', as well as clearing up lingering questions about the Marauders. Naama: I don't know whether Harry will cause a disaster, but I certainly agree with Pippin that JKR has set up the story for a huge clash between Harry and Snape. Harry blames (irrationaly) Snape for Sirius' death. This death has already caused him to cast an Unforgivable - feeble though it may have been. In GoF, Harry fantasises of Crucio- ing Snape. All this, for me, builds towards Harry casting an Unforgivable curse on Snape. This time, successfuly. He will probably have (what he thinks are) justified reasons - such as believing that Snape is a traitor. Of course, it will turn out to be not true (the way it has never been true before). This, I believe, will bring Harry's moral crisis to a head. By moral crisis I mean Harry's unchecked rage, his pride and stubborness, self-pity. Possibly this is what JKR meant when she said that in HBP Harry will have to learn to control his emotions. It works, I think, with the story as a whole. Snape consistently has been the one person that brings out the worst out of Harry - anger, rudeness, baseless suspicions, stubborness, etc. It's kind of fitting that he will be the one that will bring Harry to his lowest moral point of his life. Thoughts? Naama From naama_gat at hotmail.com Wed Apr 6 14:28:09 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 14:28:09 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127188 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" > > Susan again: > I am most intrigued by the comments about bullying, lack of ability > on *communal* traits such as agreeableness [hee!], and the seeking >of external self-validation (Order of Merlin, anyone?). > > Granted that we have little insight into adolescent Snape, so we > can't be certain whether the typical adolescent manifestations of > narcissism were present for him, but they certainly don't seem OoC > from what we do know and from adult Snape's behavior. > JKR has described Snape as "deeply horrible," "sadistic," and one >who abuses his power. Many HPfGUers see him as a classic bully. >And even many of those who see him more in the role of classic > schoolmaster than bully do acknowledge that his behavior w/ Harry, > Neville & occasionally Hermione is cruel or excessive. > > Wouldn't a narcissistic Snape explain a *lot* about his inability to tolerate "dunderheads," his annoyance with know-it-all Hermione, his snarky put-downs of others? For everyone who is *lesser* than he in ability actually builds him up, and anyone who is *equal* to or > *greater* than him in ability, challenges him uncomfortably. But that last one isn't really true. He is loyal to DD and with McConagall, he is as closest to friendly as we've ever seen him. I know that some of his traits fit the description you've brought above, but do you really get that "fragile ego" feel with him? For instance, he keeps applying, year after year, for the DADA position. You'd think that a guy with a fragile ego won't keep on setting himself up for rejection like that. I don't know. I just don't get fragility there. But I'll tell you who is the classical narcissist - Voldemort. He really fits that description (Hitler also has been "diagnosed" as a narcissist). The need to prove himself in front of his DEs. His rage when Harry told him that DD is more powerful than him. With Voldemort, you really get the feeling that for him, other people function purely as audience (unless they are means to an end - therefore, to be manipulated). Snape isn't like that - he does have authentic (albeit twisted, mostly) relationships with people around him. In a sense, his ability to be so hurt by what other people do to him (and he doesn't acutally go violent when insulted) shows that he is not a narcissist. I think... yeah. Just twisted and bitter. Naama From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 14:56:41 2005 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 14:56:41 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127189 *** coming out of lurkers'dom *** I don't know if this has been talked about in earlier posts, but re- reading the books with a focus on Ron's role, not just Harry's, I was struck with this: I don't think that Ron really wants to be an Auror because he likes fighting Dark Arts, but mainly because it sounds "cool" to him. I get the feeling that Jo is going to play a bit about Ron's career choice, and give it as an example of how sometimes kids get some skewed notion of a profession and idealize it. In all honesty, I don't really think that Ron is cut out to be an Auror. But disregarding this aspect, I believe that he has not thought about it as deeply as perhaps Harry or Hermione have. Perhaps his line of thinking is that he wants to fit in, match up to his two best friends, and therefore he chooses same career as them (though we don't know about Hermione's yet.) I gathered this from GoF, when fake Moody told both Harry and Hermione that they had good Auror thinking, and Ron tried to show him that he did too. Jo has said that she'll write about 'growing-up' kids. She cannot really do much with Harry's career path, she's got the prophecy to do that for him. With Hermione, we know that she'll be able to choose whatever she wants, because her OWLs will be good enough. But with Ron, she's created a subplot (as a debater friend from another site pointed this out to me) for him that follows the 'rights of passage' line. She made Ron a Prefect and a Keeper, two things that he hoped for but never expected. She made him realize that those not only came with rights and privileges but with responsibilities and hard work as well. So it follows (IMO) that she'll probably make Ron go through the ordeal of having to decide which career path he really wants to chose from. OTOH, this Auror career will be possible if Ron gets an O in Potions (or so it's what we are led to believe). Perhaps Jo is building up for a Ron that doesn't qualify for Auror training, thus setting up the scenario of the typical case of 'not measuring up to the standards', which teenagers unfortunately have to go through at around this age... I came to this when I connected that Jo let us (and Harry) know that Ron got the Prefect badge because of Dumbledore's decision to not give it to Harry... why would she let us know that? Then she let Ron have an 'easy' year (on a personal level, of course, his family was going through tough times), pretty much everything went his way: Prefect badge, new broom, Keeper, Harry was not popular, Quidditch Cup. She's probably setting up a difficult 6th. year for Ron... What do you think? Marcela From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed Apr 6 15:13:08 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 15:13:08 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Whither Harry? (was Re: Whither Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127190 >Naama: >I don't know whether Harry will cause a disaster, but I certainly >agree with Pippin that JKR has set up the story for a huge clash >between Harry and Snape. Harry blames (irrationaly) Snape for Sirius' >death. This death has already caused him to cast an Unforgivable - >feeble though it may have been. In GoF, Harry fantasises of Crucio- >ing Snape. >All this, for me, builds towards Harry casting an Unforgivable curse >on Snape. This time, successfuly. He will probably have (what he >thinks are) justified reasons - such as believing that Snape is a >traitor. Of course, it will turn out to be not true (the way it has >never been true before). This, I believe, will bring Harry's moral >crisis to a head. By moral crisis I mean Harry's unchecked rage, his >pride and stubborness, self-pity. Possibly this is what JKR meant >when she said that in HBP Harry will have to learn to control his >emotions. >It works, I think, with the story as a whole. Snape consistently has >been the one person that brings out the worst out of Harry - anger, >rudeness, baseless suspicions, stubborness, etc. It's kind of fitting >that he will be the one that will bring Harry to his lowest moral >point of his life. >Thoughts? >Naama ,%}ry n{3 ,i hope ? sc5>io is -pletely wr;g4 ,b my -;ts d1l mo/ly ) ,h>ry's blam+ ( ,snape ov} ,sirius4 ,at ! 5d ( ,,ootp1 ,h>ry 0 9 ! e>ly /ages ( grief1 :5 a p}son w blame "ey"o & any"o1 if "!'s any way 6blame4 ,at ! 2g9n+ ( ,,hbp1 ( c|rse1 ?|< x's be5 two ye>s = u1 x w pick up "r af t fate;l trip 6! m9i/ry4 ,i ?9k ,h>ry's ang} is natural n{1 b ,i ?9k ev5tu,y he w blame hmf mo/ ( all4 ,he'll 2 s busy blam+ hmf1 t he won't 2 blam+ o!rs1 9clud+ ~? :o des}ve ! blame1 ,voldemort & ,bellatrix4 ,my hope is t he w le>n n 6blame hmf or ,snape or ,dum#dore1 2c wa/+ 8 emo;n l t w n help hm 6get hmf "u 3trol4 ,i don't h any 3c}n ab 8 use (! ,cruciatus1 2c 9 8 he>t1 he cd n d x4 ,i don't ?9k he'll 2 a# 6d "o 9 future1 un.s he m/ 6def5d "s"o close 6hm4 ,= ,h>ry1 ! loss ( ,sirius m/ 2 ! f/ r1l & deeply p}sonal grief ( 8 life1 ev5 m 9t5se 2c ( all ! circum/.es surr.d+ ,sirius4 ,h>ry 0 too "y 6h exp}i;ed ? k9d ( grief ov} 8 p>5ts' d1?4 ,s1 6me1 8 feel+s & blame at ! 5d ( ,,ootp >e natural & normal & won't necess>ily turn hm 96"s"o :o cd easily & su3ess;ly use ! un=giva#s4 ,%}ry >------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-- >What would our lives be like without music, dance, and theater? >Donate or volunteer in the arts today at Network for Good! >http://us.click.yahoo.com/pkgkPB/SOnJAA/Zx0JAA/s4wxlB/TM >--------------------------------------------------------------------~- >Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/hbfile.html >Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! >Yahoo! Groups Links From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Apr 6 15:19:07 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 15:19:07 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127191 SSSusan previously: > > Wouldn't a narcissistic Snape explain a *lot* about his inability > > to tolerate "dunderheads," his annoyance with know-it-all > > Hermione, his snarky put-downs of others? For everyone who is > > *lesser* than he in ability actually builds him up, and anyone > > who is *equal* to or *greater* than him in ability, challenges > > him uncomfortably. Naama: > But that last one isn't really true. He is loyal to DD and with > McConagall, he is as closest to friendly as we've ever seen him. SSSusan: Indeed, Snape does appear to be closer to DD & McGonagall than to anyone else. But he wouldn't see them as CHALLENGES the way he would others. It's the notion that a *student* (such as Hermione) might challenge him with her level of skill or knowledge; it's the notion that someone *else* besides him ? and Potter at that! ? supposedly, per the prophecy, has the ability to stop Voldemort. DD & McG do not have this ability; they understand & accept that the WW needs Harry. But Snape *resents* it, in my view. Also, consider what DD has ostensibly DONE for Snape ? believed him, trusted him, *validated* him, all things which the narcissist craves. McGonagall, we don't know, but I can speculate that they respect each other's intellectual & magical abilities and/or that she acknowledged his talents while a student. He is *appreciated* by these two probably more than by anyone else, and this plays into it for a narcissist. Naama: > I know that some of his traits fit the description you've brought > above, but do you really get that "fragile ego" feel with him? For > instance, he keeps applying, year after year, for the DADA position. > You'd think that a guy with a fragile ego won't keep on setting > himself up for rejection like that. SSSusan: I have always believed it possible that the DADA "applications" are part of the ruse between DD & Snape to keep the DE kids thinking/reporting that Snape's after the spot. Naama: > In a sense, his ability to be so hurt by what other people do to > him (and he doesn't acutally go violent when insulted) shows that > he is not a narcissist. I think... yeah. Just twisted and bitter. SSSusan: Well, let me refer you to this part of the essay again: "In order to sustain their exaggeratedly positive self-views, narcissists constantly seek external self-validation in the form of attention & admiration from others . When threatened, narcissists respond with intensely negative emotions.... Furthermore, narcissists respond to ego threat with aggression against others." Think of the end of PoA and Snape's incredible ranting & raging after Sirius escaped. He was apopleptic! Unless you buy into OscarWinner! Snape, that was genuine rage and (as DD categorized it) disappointment. He wanted that Order of Merlin (read: acknowledgement, validation), and he wanted revenge against Sirius. Think also of Snape's comment to DD: "Surely you remember that he tried to kill *ME*?" Again, the possible implication that he craves validation, craves being considered important. I still see it as a good fit. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 15:26:04 2005 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 15:26:04 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127192 "...Dumbledore is really Ron/Harry 'from the future' Your intentiveness knows no bounds, and I do not mean that sarcastically; these theories open up exhilarating new vistas of possibility... but they're wrong. Could it be that by speculating that Harry/ Ron becomes Dumbledore, you are seeking reassurance that neither dies young? I've also heard a whisper about Ron and Hermione's son time-travelling, so I shall go further and tell you that NONE of the characters in the books has returned from the future. As for the idea of Ron and Hermione having a son... (chuckles as the distant roars of a million shippers reach my ears, all cursing me to an eternity of unsatisfied curiosity). ..." J.K. Rowling, 6 April 2005 She also said that Flamel is dead. There goes one of my candidates for the HBP... So, I believe that one of the famous theories is debunked... Ron is Ron, not Dumbledore. Now, did she laugh at the idea of Hermione and Ron having a son? Marcela From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 15:39:45 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 08:39:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lucius, Dobby and side #3 was:Lucius Malfoy's Ambition In-Reply-To: <20050330063640.E0BA823CFE@ws5-3.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: <20050406153946.90437.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127193 --- thursday morning wrote: > Magda, you said you think Dobby was "too terrified and emotional > all through COS for him to have been obeying his master's orders." > I didn't read it like this. I even went back and reread ch2 of COS > ('Dobby's Warning') and I really don't see Dobby terrified. JKR > actually used the term 'slyly' when they got to the topic of the > letters. No, I've always read Dobby as being a little drama que- > er, drama elf. I don't think Lucius micromanaged Dobby's actions > but rather sent him off with the barebones "Keep Harry Potter alive > and preferably away from Hogwarts" and Dobby came up with the > specifics of how to do so. I don't see how this prevents him from > being an "overall good guy character who we're expected to admire." Sorry for the delay in responding but I've got a backlog (again) and am whittling it down. Other people have responded so I won't repeat what they said but I will reiterate that Dobby is a unique elf and for him to be acting under Lucius Malfoy's command when he warns Harry in COS would really negate a lot of what we see as his loyalty and commitment to Harry in GOF and OOTP. Dobby is quite clearly forcing himself to push the limits of what is allowable elf behaviour in taking the initiative as he does. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From rosie_27018 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 12:04:52 2005 From: rosie_27018 at yahoo.com (Ann Crutchley) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:04:52 -0000 Subject: Secrets from Harry (was: Lily's love) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127194 > Beto wrote: > > I always thought that the love answer was sort of a cop out on > > Dumbledore's part. I doubt that Lily was the only mother who died > > before her child that loved her child. If her love was the only > > variable then she was either more powerful than anyone else or > > loved Harry more than any other mother/child. That's why I assume > > that Dumbledore was keeping secrets and assumed Harry wasn't mature > > enough to handle all the information. Because hearing your mom > > loved you so much that it protected you from the worst curse in > > existence is a nice thing if you are an unloved orphan. And > > playing the devil's advocate for the Slytherin Dumbledore, such a > > statement is a nice way to give a vague answer while also diverting > > Harry's mind from the question at hand. > > I agree with you, Beto, it does sound like a cop out on Dumbledore's part. If Lily was doing research on how to protect them from Voldemort then why not just tell Harry that? It was war, it was the darkest days the WW knew at the time, and if they were in the Order and were doing research, then why not tell Harry? That doesn't make him less loved, he's loved because they did try to protect him. If all that's true that they did research, why not do something to protect Neville? He was in danger too until Voldemort choose Harry. Not until that moment did they know for sure who Voldemort feared was his equal. I think Dumbledore has more than an idea what's going to happen. He never seems suprised at what happens, he helps Harry find away to defeat Voldemort in a round about way. He may not know exactly what will happen, but he has an inkling. Ann From rosie_27018 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 12:23:10 2005 From: rosie_27018 at yahoo.com (Ann Crutchley) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:23:10 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127195 > Alla: > > Sirius and Snape were not best friends before Prank ocurred, right? > Snape is NOT stupid , right? > > Why would Snape listen to ANYTHING Sirius says? Why would he BELIEVE > anything Sirius says? > > As Finwitch said, why would Snape even stop to have any kind of > conversation with Sirius?. Can anyone really say at one time or another you haven't pulled a prank on someone? That we didn't like someone in school because of their attitude or the way they dress or other reasons? If you're agronant as James and Sirus was, and they played Quiddich which is a sport, who hasn't known a Jock who was agronant and thought they ruled the school and picked on the geeks. They are wizards they have other ways to pull pranks and etc..But really has anyone not been picked on at school and remember it and think badly of the person who did it to you? I dislike Snape but I will say this if the prank had been pulled on me I would be upset too and carry a grudge. At some point you have to grow up and move on but Snape had an awful childhood and probably thought of school as an escape just like Harry, and to have that happen at his special place is very traumic and is very like never to get over it. And then carry it over to Harry who gets all this attention, probably something he never had himself. I think Sirus is reliving some memories that brings him comfort.Things he and James did together. I think we've all forgot that Sirus was in prison for all those years. Of course those days at school are still with him, he never really had a life, never had time to mature with experince, never had time to grow and become a man in a sense, and thinking of the old days and killing Pettigrew is probably what kept him going. And going to prison and never really grieveing for your best friend, that's got to be awful. Of course he couldn't move on, and there is Harry so much like James in some ways, that of course he felt he had James and wanted to relive those days. I think if he had time and freedom he could have grown in his personality, but would we have wanted him in other way? He encourage Harry and gave him hope, something he hadn't really had from a paternal figure except Dumbledore, and Dumbledore spent so much time keeping the secerts and trying to protect Harry from that heavy burden that he couldn't be what Harry really need, an adult on Harry's side willing to tell the truth and willing to let Harry decide for himself. We were all young once and need to keep that in mind with our own children and I think Sirus did that. I know Molly Weasley loves Harry and is protective of him and that's great too. But everybody needs one person to just believe in them without selfish reasons. Above all that where were the teachers when all these pranks were taking place? They always turn up when Harry and Draco are about to rumble. Ann From feenyjam at msu.edu Wed Apr 6 12:58:59 2005 From: feenyjam at msu.edu (greenfirespike) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 12:58:59 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house...? - Likely Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127196 Steve/bboyminn says: > > When Tom killed his father and grandparents, as far as we know, he > wiped out the House of Riddle. So who inherited the house, land, and > money? It had to go somewhere. Minus a true heir, the estate would > have been dispursed to minor and distant relatives of the Riddle > family, which would have essentially dissolved the fortune. > > Perhaps someone has previously mentioned this, and if so I preemptively apologize, but all discussion concerning who gets the Riddle house or who bought the riddle house are dependent upon the assumption that the Riddles failed to leave a will behind. With the Riddles having already disinherited young Thomas (or is it just plain Tom?), I see no reason that a will was not created, and left the property to Frank. Frank, being the Riddles loyal friend, may have become owner of the Riddle house. This theory would explain a few things; such as why Frank never moved into the house, because he felt awkward about the generous gift from the Riddles. Furthermore, it would explain why the Riddle house may have kept its name within the community. Just throwing it out there and seeing if any of it sticks. Greenfirespike From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 16:19:11 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:19:11 -0000 Subject: Goblins Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127197 >From jkrowling.com Just like Dean Thomas (see `Extras'), Flitwick has a background that I now realise will never see its way into the books because it is not relevant to the plot. He is human but with a dash of goblin ancestry ? something like a great, great, great grandfather. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/faq_view.cfm?id=95 GEO: Considering how Flitwick apparently has Goblin ancestry does that mean that the goblins are a subspecies of homo sapiens instead of say their own distinct species considering they can breed with humans and have fertile offspring in the case of Flitwick's ancestors. One wonders now if that applies to either the House-Elves and Giants. From siskiou at vcem.com Wed Apr 6 16:39:13 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 09:39:13 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1177355774.20050406093913@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127198 Hi, Wednesday, April 6, 2005, 8:26:04 AM, templar1112002 wrote: > Now, did she laugh at the idea of Hermione and Ron having a son? No, she laughed at the idea of having stirred up all the H/Hr and R/Hr shippers once again by skirting the subject ;) -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 16:31:02 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 16:31:02 -0000 Subject: Secrets from Harry (was: Lily's love) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ann Crutchley" > If all that's true > that they did research, why not do something to protect Neville? He was > in danger too until Voldemort choose Harry. Not until that moment did > they know for sure who Voldemort feared was his equal. I GEO: Because Snape who was Dumbledore's spy within Voldemort's inner circle informed them that Voldemort was going after the Potters not the Longbottoms. The Longbottoms were probably also in danger like the rest of the OOTP for their opposition of Voldemort and his Death Eaters, but not a target like Harry and his parents. This also brings up the question of why a pureblood fanatic like Voldemort saw Harry as a threat instead of Neville. True DD postulates that it was because Voldemort saw himself in Harry, but the resemblances at that time was almost tenuous at best and Dumbledore certainly didn't have the opportunity to directly question Voldemort about his motives and his explaination in the finale of OOTP is at best speculation. From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 14:02:19 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 14:02:19 -0000 Subject: Empty picture-/ Photographs and sounds? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127200 > > Eustace_Scrubb now: > > I agree fully with you on the photographs. The photographs don't even > have the capability of speech. It's just a silent film loop, really. Chys: Didn't the people in the little picture that Moody showed to Harry when he took him aside have people complaining or making noises when he pushed them to move so Harry could see his parents in the background? Chys From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 17:07:15 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 17:07:15 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127201 Marcela passed along this tidbit from JKR's website: JKR: > I've also heard a whisper about Ron and Hermione's son > time-travelling, so I shall go further and tell you that NONE of > the characters in the books has returned from the future. Eustace_Scrubb: And in her usual way, JKR has closed the door on one or two lines of speculation while suggesting others. To wit, neither Ron nor Harry travelled to the past to become Dumbledore. Further NONE of the characters has returned from the future. Of course this can only mean that _someone else_ travelled to the past and became Dumbledore. Or, at the very least, ONE of the characters may have come from the PAST. There...go on and open up as many exhilariting new vistas as these revelations allow! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com Wed Apr 6 18:29:22 2005 From: Gregory.Lynn at gmail.com (Gregory Lynn) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 14:29:22 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127202 On Apr 6, 2005 11:26 AM, templar1112002 wrote: > So, I believe that one of the famous theories is debunked... Ron is > Ron, not Dumbledore. > > Marcela > Actually all it means is that Dumbledore isn't Ron come back from the future. He could still be a Ron that is artificially aged or who went back to the past and grew old from there. Or even a Ron from the past resulting from a cloning of the current Ron after he goes to the past in the future. -- Gregory Lynn From grey.wolf.c at gmail.com Wed Apr 6 18:41:13 2005 From: grey.wolf.c at gmail.com (Grey Wolf) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:41:13 -0000 Subject: Lily's love (was Re: My predictions in April 2003) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127203 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: > though he is the central antagonist and Dark Lord, in his moments of > exposition and as Rowling's mouthpiece he usually doesn't lie. I disagree very strongly. Voldemort had every reason to lie during the Graveyward Gathering, in my strongly held opinion. In fact, several of his actions during the scene point out that, even in the face of his seemingly strong knowledge of the charm, he is not all that sure himself that he undderstands it. It's way too long to go into it here, but you might want to check out the posts on Magic Dishwasher (particularly the Spying Game part 2, #40044 - thank God for an easily remembered number, since fantastic posts is down and yahoomort's search couldn't be more useless if they tried) to understand what I'm talking about. Hope that helps, Grey Wolf, who y'all weren't really expecting to have forgotten about Magic Dishwasher, had you? :D From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 18:42:18 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:42:18 -0000 Subject: Empty picture-/ Photographs and sounds? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127204 Chys wrote: > Didn't the people in the little picture that Moody showed to Harry > when he took him aside have people complaining or making noises when > he pushed them to move so Harry could see his parents in the > background? Eustace_Scrubb: Had a chance to check this and they don't talk or make noises. Moody tells them to "budge along" and "shift aside" and pokes the picture (apparently with his finger, though I'd always sort of imagined him doing it with his wand). They do jostle each other so that everyone can be seen clearly, but they don't talk to each other or Moody. I get the feeling that the poking is sort of a built-in way of focusing in on certain parts of the photo and that Moody's grumblings aren't really necessary, but who knows? Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 19:38:43 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 19:38:43 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127205 Alla: Sirius and Snape were not best friends before Prank ocurred, right? Snape is NOT stupid , right? Why would Snape listen to ANYTHING Sirius says? Why would he BELIEVE anything Sirius says? As Finwitch said, why would Snape even stop to have any kind of conversation with Sirius?. Ann: Can anyone really say at one time or another you haven't pulled a prank on someone? That we didn't like someone in school because of their attitude or the way they dress or other reasons? If you're agronant as James and Sirus was, and they played Quiddich which is a sport, who hasn't known a Jock who was agronant and thought they ruled the school and picked on the geeks. They are wizards they have other ways to pull pranks and etc..But really has anyone not been picked on at school and remember it and think badly of the person who did it to you? I dislike Snape but I will say this if the prank had been pulled on me I would be upset too and carry a grudge. Alla: Erm, yes, absolutely, but that was not exactly my point. I was just arguing that there are holes, many of them in the Prank story and hopefully it will be revealed sooner or late. For that reason ( holes in the story) I am very reluctant to say that Sirius planned to kill Snape. I don't see it as supported in the text yet, that is all. I am not saying that Sirius did a good deed, not at all, but I don't exclude the possibility that Prank was somebode else's setup. Again, sorry for repeating myself , but surely Sirius and Snape did not like each other way before Prank happened, right? JKR did say that they loathed each other, so why stop and have a chat with each other? Why, why, why? Can someone give me a realistic speculation of mechanics of the Prank, because right now it is very hard for me to imagine. Let's say the person whom I do NOT like at all and who I have a fairly good reason to suspect does not like me tells me some kind of information, especially, let's say go to some kind of suspicious location and there I will find something I was curious about. I don't think I would believe anything such person says. Would you? Moreover I would think that there are reasons for me NOT to go tot hat location, because I can be harmed. I don't know, I just find the accounts of the Prank to be not complete. Just my opinion of course, Alla. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 19:46:52 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 19:46:52 -0000 Subject: Lily's love (was Re: My predictions in April 2003) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127206 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Grey Wolf" wrote: > I disagree very strongly. Voldemort had every reason to lie during > the Graveyward Gathering, in my strongly held opinion. In fact, > several of his actions during the scene point out that, GEO: So far everything else he has said has come to pass. The circumstances and plot that he initiated with his loyal death eaters in order to capture Harry and regain his old body was true and his plan to ally himself with the giants and dementors and fill his circle with his remaining servants locked up in Azkaban has also come to pass in OOTP. Thus I really don't think he lied about the events that happened in GH that left him non-corporeal or that Lily actually planned to activate the maternal protection as a trump card. > even in the > face of his seemingly strong knowledge of the charm, he is not all > that sure himself that he undderstands it. GEO: That I disagree, his younger self that he put in the diary in CoS was able to understand what happened and satisfy his curiosity with just a short conversation with Harry in the Chamber of Secrets. In the end it's not his lack of understanding of the charm and its mechanics, but his lack of understanding and comprehension of love why he ended that way. Both Rowling and Dumbledore have said pretty much the same. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 20:12:07 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 20:12:07 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house...? - Likely Candidates In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127207 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greenfirespike" wrote: > > > > Steve/bboyminn says: > > > > > When Tom killed his father and grandparents, as far as we know, he > > wiped out the House of Riddle. So who inherited the house, land, > > and> money? It had to go somewhere. ... > > > Greenfirespike: > > ..edited... > > With the Riddles having already disinherited young Thomas (or is it > just plain Tom?), I see no reason that a will was not created, and > left the property to Frank. Frank, being the Riddles loyal friend, > may have become owner of the Riddle house. > bboyminn: First, we don't know that the Riddle officially and legally disinherited Young Tom Jr. We can be reasonably sure they ignored him, probably denied him, maybe even disavowed him, perhaps disowned him, but disinherit is a legal matter. To my way of thinking they would have had to create a Will that specifically said, young Tom Jr gets nothing. And, I'm not convinced they went that far. As far as a Will in general, I'm sure the senior Riddles assumed Tom Sr would inherit everything and carry on the family name. With a clearcut indisputable heir, Tom Sr, available, he would get everything by default. The only need for a Will would be to add inclusions for Cousin Millie, and any exclusions for someone like Tom Jr. Not saying that couldn't happen, just saying I don't think it did. They had a clearcut indisputable heir in Tom Sr, and I'm sure they assumed he would out live them. Certainly they never dream of a possibility in which all three would die at the same time. Even if there was a will disinheriting Tom Jr, if we assume no other real close relatives; it reasonable that Tom Jr would have had ground to contest the Will. Who has a greater right of inheritance, an obscure cousin here and there, or the son of Tom Sr himself. In addition, in the absents of other children, Tom Jr, from a legal perspective, is the only person who is able to carry on the House of Riddle, the bloodline and Family name. Can't say he would definitely win, on that he certainly has legal ground for appeal. > Greenfirespike continues: > > This theory would explain a few things; such as why Frank never > moved into the house, because he felt awkward about the generous > gift from the Riddles. ... > > Just throwing it out there and seeing if any of it sticks. > > Greenfirespike bboyminn: Well, it might stick, but I think is more likely slowly sliding down the wall. One small flaw in this theory, the books specifically state that the house was sold a few times, then some rich guy bought it and kept it solely for 'tax purposes'. That seems to rule out Frank. Though, I will admit that it is possible to concoct a scenario in which Frank is the rich guy who now keeps it for tax purposes. He may have inherited, sold, bought, and resold, then finally given up, and bought it and kept it. Then lived on as the caretaker, content to live a quiet modest life. While that scenario could be created, I personally don't think so. It has a logical flow, but I think it reaches way too far off-page to make its case. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 21:22:21 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:22:21 -0000 Subject: James and Sirius (was: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127208 >>Betsy: >It's also interesting to me that James redeemes himself and wins both Dumbledore's approval, and quite possibly Lily's love by pulling away from Sirius' influence.< >>Alla: >I'd like to know what are you basing this assumption on? Do you mean after school or while still in Hogwarts?< Betsy: I was following the timeline that Sirius sets up Snape for the Prank, Snape falls for it, James goes against Sirius and saves Snape's life, James becomes Head Boy, James gets the girl. Obviously, James doesn't totally turn from Sirius. But he does recognize that Sirius has gone too far this time and that there are some lines that shouldn't be crossed. Dumbledore, thrilled to see one of Hogwarts "golden boys" learn that lesson, and also happy to see that James is willing to stand up to Sirius, where Remus was not (though Remus would have been taking on *both* Sirius and James - so I cut him some slack), decides that James has what it takes to be Head Boy. I'm taking a leap with Lily. Who knows what finally changes her mind. But I'm guessing that James starts to take things a bit more seriously (no pun intended) after the infamous Prank. >>Alla: >If you are talking about Hogwarts times, then may I submit that we don't know who was more under whose influence.< Betsy: I'm going to disagree with you here. In the one scene JKR shows James and Sirius interacting, James was *most definitely* under Sirius' influence. The attack on Snape occured because Sirius was bored and James was looking for a way to entertain him. Even *Harry* picks up on that. And when he confronts Sirius about it later, Sirius does not deny it. It can be argued that this is just one interaction, but I submit that when an author has limited time in which to introduce a character she doesn't waste her precious words by having the character act *out* of character. [Redhen has an excellent post on the relationship of James and Sirius here: http://www.redhen-publications.com/Padfoot-etc.html ] >>Alla: >If you are talking about after Hogwarts time, then I see even less signs of James pulling away from Sirius. he named him Harry's Godfather, he was present at the Cristening. James asked Sirius to become a Secret Keeper. I don't see any signs of them parting the ways.< Betsy: No, James doesn't fully pull away from Sirius. Which, unfortunately, leads to his and Lily's death. But, by wrecking the Prank Sirius set up (and I love Redhen's theory that Sirius was drunk at the time - thanks to Amber for linking that post in message # 127145) James did show himself capable of second guessing Sirius. Betsy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 21:41:15 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:41:15 -0000 Subject: James and Sirius (was: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127209 Betsy: It's also interesting to me that James redeemes himself and wins both Dumbledore's approval, and quite possibly Lily's love by pulling away from Sirius' influence.< Alla: I'd like to know what are you basing this assumption on? Do you mean after school or while still in Hogwarts?< Betsy: I'm taking a leap with Lily. Who knows what finally changes her mind. But I'm guessing that James starts to take things a bit more seriously (no pun intended) after the infamous Prank. Alla: Lily agreed to Sirius being a Secret Keeper. She apparently agreed to Sirius' suggestion to switch Secret Keepers. I think it is possible that she did trust Sirius after all, but that is just me of course. Alla: If you are talking about Hogwarts times, then may I submit that we don't know who was more under whose influence.< Betsy: I'm going to disagree with you here. In the one scene JKR shows James and Sirius interacting, James was *most definitely* under Sirius' influence. The attack on Snape occured because Sirius was bored and James was looking for a way to entertain him. Even *Harry* picks up on that. And when he confronts Sirius about it later, Sirius does not deny it. It can be argued that this is just one interaction, but I submit that when an author has limited time in which to introduce a character she doesn't waste her precious words by having the character act *out* of character. Alla: I think we are putting different meaning into "under influence'. I am talking about under influence in more global sense than being an idiot in one scene. And yes, JKR definitely cannot afford to waste space, but she drops hints ( as Sirius staying with James family) which made me think that at least quite often James was an influence in Sirius life, but again - just me. Alla earlier: If you are talking about after Hogwarts time, then I see even less signs of James pulling away from Sirius. he named him Harry's Godfather, he was present at the Cristening. James asked Sirius to become a Secret Keeper. I don't see any signs of them parting the ways. Betsy: No, James doesn't fully pull away from Sirius. Which, unfortunately, leads to his and Lily's death. But, by wrecking the Prank Sirius set up (and I love Redhen's theory that Sirius was drunk at the time - thanks to Amber for linking that post in message # 127145) James did show himself capable of second guessing Sirius. Alla: I disagree with your assertion " not pulling away from Sirius - leads to James and Lily death" I don't think that it is supported by the text. I wanted to read Red Hen theory, but unfortunately my computer won't let me go there. Grrr. JMO, Alla From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 21:41:15 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:41:15 -0000 Subject: The Prank (was: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127210 >>Alla: >For that reason (holes in the story) I am very reluctant to say that Sirius planned to kill Snape.< Betsy: I think most folks agree that Sirius was *not* planning on killing Snape. I *do* think that if James hadn't intervened the Prank would have *ended up* killing Snape. And I think that *Snape* thinks Sirius tried to kill him - hence the grudge. But I don't think murder was what Sirius intended. >>Alla: >Can someone give me a realistic speculation of mechanics of the Prank, because right now it is very hard for me to imagine.< Betsy: I can think of several - actually, I've read several in fannon. Sirius pretends to let something slip where Snape can overhear. Snape, not realizing he's been set up, thinks he's learned something vital that could get James and Sirius expelled. Sirius fakes a fit of rage and "says too much." Again, Snape thinks he's learned something, not realizing he's been set up. Sirius notices Snape sneaking around after him and leads him to the Whomping Willow. Snape thinks he's spied something out, doesn't realize he's being played. There's many more where that came from, but really, it's not *that* difficult to get someone to go where you want them to go. 80's teen movies are *filled* with pranks of that sort. It doesn't necessarily call for Sirius baldly telling Snape that there's something interesting located under the Whomping Willow. Of course, this is all guess-work. The final resolution is up to JKR. :) Betsy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 21:54:14 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:54:14 -0000 Subject: The Prank (was: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127211 Alla: Can someone give me a realistic speculation of mechanics of the Prank, because right now it is very hard for me to imagine.< Betsy: I can think of several - actually, I've read several in fannon. Sirius pretends to let something slip where Snape can overhear. Snape, not realizing he's been set up, thinks he's learned something vital that could get James and Sirius expelled. Sirius fakes a fit of rage and "says too much." Again, Snape thinks he's learned something, not realizing he's been set up. Sirius notices Snape sneaking around after him and leads him to the Whomping Willow. Snape thinks he's spied something out, doesn't realize he's being played. Of course, this is all guess-work. The final resolution is up to JKR. :) Alla: Sorry, but I have another question. Let something slip to whom? Staged conversation? I guess it is possible, but how did he know that Snape will be listening? I am also wondering what is the basis of fandom's ideas for "leading Snape into the Shack' Again, talking and acting on it are two very different things, IMO. Nice speculation over all, thanks. JMO, Alla From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 21:57:17 2005 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 21:57:17 -0000 Subject: Goblins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127212 >From jkrowling.com Just like Dean Thomas (see `Extras'), Flitwick has a background that I now realise will never see its way into the books because it is not relevant to the plot. He is human but with a dash of goblin ancestry ? something like a great, great, great grandfather. GEO wrote: Considering how Flitwick apparently has Goblin ancestry does that mean that the goblins are a subspecies of homo sapiens instead of say their own distinct species considering they can breed with humans and have fertile offspring in the case of Flitwick's ancestors. One wonders now if that applies to either the House-Elves and Giants. ***Marcela: I also wonder how come Flitwick was not detected by Rita Skeeter, or Umbridge... They are considered 'beings' according to FBAWTFT. As to your question, I'd say that they are not a subspecies of homo sapiens, because they are all magical... I mean, you have that the only difference between wizards/witches and Muggles is the magic itself. There are no goblin-muggles around... unless there is a complete other Goblin world hidden from Muggles and Wizards that we don't know about. I'd say that they are a species in its own. Besides, their brand of magic seems very different from the Wizardkind. Despite all this, evidently, there is some genetic compatibility and goblins and wizards/muggles can procreate, o.O I also wonder why Dumbledore has not used Flitwick as a liason speaker with the Goblins -at least it wasn't mentioned in OoTP... BTW, did you notice that in the same answer: "...This is only interesting in as much as it gives him a perhaps unexpected empathy for people like Hagrid who are, in Death Eater parlance, half-breeds. However, Flitwick and Hagrid have never had a scene together, so Flitwick's genetic composition has been relegated to the very back of my mind over the six novels in which he features, although I think it has informed his character. Slightly dotty though he may be, he is welcoming of all students, whatever their background (he did say in `Philosopher's Stone' that he was very fond of Lily, thus establishing that he was not prejudiced against Muggle-borns). ..." There she goes again... we don't know if she's talking about the six books she's already written or just six books of seven... Does this mean that Flitwick will not 'be there' in the last book? The use of her Simple Present in 'in which he features' is confusing me a bit... Marcela From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 22:15:46 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:15:46 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127213 >>SSSusan: >Well, let me refer you to this part of the essay again: >"In order to sustain their exaggeratedly positive self-views, narcissists constantly seek external self-validation in the form of attention & admiration from others . When threatened, narcissists respond with intensely negative emotions.... Furthermore, narcissists respond to ego threat with aggression against others."< Betsy: But I don't really recall Snape looking for validation in others. His lack of grooming suggests that he could actually give two rips about the opinions of others. Plus, there's his whole "brewing in the dungeons" persona. Snape lives underground, chooses to flit about the castle at night when no one is about (though I'm betting he's on rounds as part of the protect-Potter-brigade) and seems to dislike social occasions (his personality at the Yule Ball). He doesn't seem to be gunning for wide-ranging approval, attention, or admiration. Lockhart, on the other hand... :) >>SSSusan: >Think of the end of PoA and Snape's incredible ranting & raging after Sirius escaped. He was apopleptic! Unless you buy into OscarWinner!Snape, that was genuine rage and (as DD categorized it) disappointment.< Betsy: Well, yes, Snape was raging and full of disappointment. He'd been on the cusp of seeing Sirius Black get his (in Snape's mind) just desserts, and it slipped through his fingers. This was a boy who'd bested him time and again in their student years. (I'm betting Sirius and James were rarely caught, and even more rarely punished for their hijinks. I doubt ugly little Severus was quite as lucky.) And, in Snape's mind, this was a boy who'd gotten away with an attempt to murder him. Of course he was livid. And I'm sure he was vastly dissapointed to not have his view of Sirius acknowledged by those Snape *does* admire - like Dumbledore. >>SSSusan: >He wanted that Order of Merlin (read: acknowledgement, validation), and he wanted revenge against Sirius.< Betsy: Revenge, I totally agree with. Order of Merlin? I'm not sure that was such a big deal. Though, Snape had greatly risked his life in his work for the Order with no public acclaim (part of being a spy) and I'm sure he liked the idea of *some* type of acknowledgement. But since we only have Lupin's word on the importance of that Order of Merlin to Snape, and since Lupin's just been sacked because of Snape (not to mention Sirius is still a fugitive because of Snape) I tend to take Lupin's dig with a large grain of salt. >>SSSusan: >Think also of Snape's comment to DD: "Surely you remember that he tried to kill *ME*?" Again, the possible implication that he craves validation, craves being considered important.< Betsy: Yes, by Dumbledore. I do think Snape craves validation and approval from Dumbledore. After all, Dumbledore rescued him from a very dark path. And it's been hinted in the books that Snape didn't have a very good father, so I wouldn't be surprised if he's stuck Dumbledore into that role. I've often thought that Snape sees himself in some sort of competition with Sirius (and perhaps all the Mauraders, maybe even Harry as James' son) for Dumbledore's love. The clashes between Snape and Sirius in OotP had a sibling rivalry feel to them (Dumbledore loves *me* best!), IMO. I think Dumbledore realizes this about Snape, and that's part of the reason he trusts Snape so much - Snape is completely loyal to him. However, just because Snape craves Dumbledore's approval, doesn't mean he craves the approval of the world. In fact, I think Snape would let the world go hang if he could please Dumbledore. Betsy From jferer at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 22:18:37 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:18:37 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127214 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Gregory Lynn wrote: > On Apr 6, 2005 11:26 AM, templar1112002 wrote: > > > So, I believe that one of the famous theories is debunked... Ron is > > Ron, not Dumbledore. > > > > > Marcela > > > Gregory Lynn: > Actually all it means is that Dumbledore isn't Ron come back from the future. > > He could still be a Ron that is artificially aged or who went back to > the past and grew old from there. Or even a Ron from the past > resulting from a cloning of the current Ron after he goes to the past > in the future. Wow. There's nothing like refloating the Titanic. What we're doing is struggling with JKR for the ownership of the characters and the story. A lot of these theories would make great fics, where we could borrow the characters for a while and make them do or be whatever we wanted. "I've also heard a whisper about Ron and Hermione's son time-travelling, so I shall go further and tell you that NONE of the characters in the books has returned from the future." -- JKR. From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 6 22:43:05 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 22:43:05 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127215 >Marcella wrote: > > I don't think that Ron really wants to be an Auror because he likes > fighting Dark Arts, but mainly because it sounds "cool" to him. > > I get the feeling that Jo is going to play a bit about Ron's career > choice, and give it as an example of how sometimes kids get some skewed > notion of a profession and idealize it. > > In all honesty, I don't really think that Ron is cut out to be an > Auror. But disregarding this aspect, I believe that he has not thought > about it as deeply as perhaps Harry or Hermione have. Perhaps his line > of thinking is that he wants to fit in, match up to his two best > friends, and therefore he chooses same career as them (though we don't > know about Hermione's yet.) Perhaps Jo is building up for > a Ron that doesn't qualify for Auror training, thus setting up the > scenario of the typical case of 'not measuring up to the standards', > which teenagers unfortunately have to go through at around this age... > > I came to this when I connected that Jo let us (and Harry) know that > Ron got the Prefect badge because of Dumbledore's decision to not give > it to Harry... why would she let us know that? Then she let Ron have > an 'easy' year (on a personal level, of course, his family was going > through tough times), pretty much everything went his way: Prefect > badge, new broom, Keeper, Harry was not popular, Quidditch Cup. She's > probably setting up a difficult 6th. year for Ron... > > What do you think? Hannah: I don't know if it was an easy year for Ron. I think it was pretty tough - maybe not as bad as some years, and obviously not as bad as Harry's. But none the less, although Ron got what he wanted to some extent, as you say, he discovered it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. I agree that Ron is unlikely to become an Auror, for the part of the reason you give. It's not that Ron isn't capable, it's just that he'll eventually realise that it's not actually what he wants to do. I don't think he's thought less about it than Harry, though. I reckon they're both about the same in that they have no really firm ideas, but picked a fairly glamourous sounding profession from the available list. I don't think Hermione wants to be an Auror, particularly. I'm sure she'd have said so if she did. I don't think it would suit her that well, though she's brainy enough and brave enough. I don't think it will be a case of Ron 'not measuring up.' I think Ron already goes through a lot of self doubt and being overshadowed, and has spent most of his life feeling like he hasn't measured up. I doubt JKR will add on failing at Auror training as well. Maybe Hermione or even Harry will learn that lesson. But Ron, I think Ron will make his own decision about a career, without worrying about what others think. That is what Ron needs to learn to do. Just my opinion Hannah From Zarleycat at aol.com Wed Apr 6 23:03:04 2005 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:03:04 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (and Life Debts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127216 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ravenclaw Bookworm" wrote: > What we know is that Dumbledore told Harry that James had saved > Severus' life. We have assumed he referred to the Prank, because > Severus keeps accusing Sirius of trying to murder him. Is it > possible we are being fooled - that this isn't the event Dumbledore > referred to? Could there have been another time when James really > did save Severus' life - from a real threat and not a prank? Marianne: <> Oh. Well. That would be a kicker, wouldn't it? Let's say you're right, and the James/Severus life debt arose from some other incident. Snape still thinks in PoA that Sirius tried, at the age of 16, to kill him (Snape). So does this mean that in addition to our much-discussed Prank, there was another instance when Sirius said or did something to lead Snape into potential mortal danger? Geez, if that's the case, no wonder Snape still has that giant chip labeled "Black" on his shoulder! And, if JKR had led us astray, and there is still this hidden incident, then perhaps that leads support to those who have postulated that we've made too much of the Prank because Remus seems to hold no lasting outrage or anger towards Sirius over how the potential lethal outcome would have affected Werewolf!Remus. OTOH, it would almost strike me as being a bit over-the-top for JKR to now have to introduce a second major incident. Unless she's never going to clear it all up for us, which I would find highly unsatisfactory. Marianne, tired of typing while wearing a wrist brace. OTOH, From t.forch at email.dk Wed Apr 6 23:31:27 2005 From: t.forch at email.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 01:31:27 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20050407012520.041508a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 127217 At 14:29 06-04-05 -0400, Gregory Lynn wrote: >On Apr 6, 2005 11:26 AM, templar1112002 wrote: > > > > So, I believe that one of the famous theories is debunked... Ron is > > Ron, not Dumbledore. Which was hardly surprising, but nice enough of her to debunk it, so that it can rest in peace. >Actually all it means is that Dumbledore isn't Ron come back from the future. > >He could still be a Ron that is artificially aged or who went back to >the past and grew old from there. Or even a Ron from the past >resulting from a cloning of the current Ron after he goes to the past >in the future. Not even by a stringent logical analysis of the text can it be brought to allow any such scenario. "NONE of the characters in the books has returned from the future." That means that none of the characters is an older version of another character. Thank god. Troels Forchhammer From jferer at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 23:38:06 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 23:38:06 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape [long] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127218 SSSusan: "Wouldn't a narcissistic Snape explain a *lot* about his inability to tolerate "dunderheads," his annoyance with know-it-all Hermione, his snarky put-downs of others? For everyone who is *lesser* than he in ability actually builds him up, and anyone who is *equal* to or *greater* than him in ability, challenges him uncomfortably. To have to encounter a Harry Potter who reminds Snape of James and James' legacy & shenanigans (including the impression that James was smarter & better than others, that he & Sirius tried to kill Snape, and that they humiliated Snape in front of his peers) would be difficult for many but nearly impossible to bear for the narcissist because of what it does to the ego and self-esteem. But to also have to encounter a Harry Potter who is apparently destined to do what he, Snape, CANNOT (i.e., defeat Voldemort) just doesn't fit cognitively with what Snape needs and can bear." In the sense of narcissistic that Snape is highly self-absorbed, I'm with you, but he does not have an "exaggeratedly *positive or inflated*, yet fragile, self-view[s]" His self-esteem is probably in the toilet, and his view of himself is fragile indeed. Snape grew up in a painful, anxious home of emotional turmoil. He came to school as an oddball, greasy kid who knew too much Dark Arts - I doubt he found friends or any validation of himself. He was persecuted by the cool, successful kids - all the time convinced that their popularity and success was unearned - and the cosmic injustice only got worse when puberty hit and he watched his tormentors pairing off with girls who would treat him like something they'd stepped in. (The last part is speculation, but consistent with everything we've seen about him.) The only attention he ever got was negative. It's no wonder he's a seething ball of rage. Snape has accomplishments, but they don't seem to be worth much to him. None of them did him any good where it counts. He lives in fear that they are all hollow. I think this is why he hungers for affirmation so much. He wants that Order of Merlin so bad, but when he woke up in a week and found that didn't make him happy either, he'd be right back where he started. How does that tie in with hating Harry? Here's a famous, popular, celebrity kid who's got friends and attention like Snape never had. What makes it worse is that he's the son of his worst tormentor. (Maybe also the son of the woman he yearned for but could never hope for, too, but we don't know that). I'm confident this is true because I've met Snape. I've met lots of Snapes. There's many people like this, and I've seen a few of those elements in the mirror. Jim Ferer From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 7 03:15:19 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 03:15:19 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius (and Life Debts) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127219 Bookworm: > What we know is that Dumbledore told Harry that James had saved > Severus' life. We have assumed he referred to the Prank, because > Severus keeps accusing Sirius of trying to murder him. Is it > possible we are being fooled - that this isn't the event Dumbledore > referred to? Could there have been another time when James really > did save Severus' life - from a real threat and not a prank? Marianne: <> Oh. Well. That would be a kicker, wouldn't it? Let's say you're right, and the James/Severus life debt arose from some other incident. Snape still thinks in PoA that Sirius tried, at the age of 16, to kill him (Snape). So does this mean that in addition to our much-discussed Prank, there was another instance when Sirius said or did something to lead Snape into potential mortal danger? Geez, if that's the case, no wonder Snape still has that giant chip labeled "Black" on his shoulder! Bookworm: I was thinking more of a different kind of danger, not one that Sirius instigated. Maybe an accident, or a stray charm gone awry... Marianne: And, if JKR had led us astray, and there is still this hidden incident, then perhaps that leads support to those who have postulated that we've made too much of the Prank because Remus seems to hold no lasting outrage or anger towards Sirius over how the potential lethal outcome would have affected Werewolf!Remus. Bookworm: Considering how JKR describes LV as such an evil being but many readers see Lucius Malfoy as more frightening, maybe we as a group see the Prank in a different light than JKR and are over-reacting to it?! <...a thought, not an accusation... no howlers, please ;-) > Marianne: OTOH, it would almost strike me as being a bit over-the-top for JKR to now have to introduce a second major incident. Unless she's never going to clear it all up for us, which I would find highly unsatisfactory. Bookworm: IIRC, she said she would give us more info about it. But I have commented before that I think some of her characters are more like caricatures, "over-the-top" stereotypes. Also, she is revealing just a little bit of info at a time. We still don't know what happened with James between the scene with Snape after OWLs and the beginning of 7th year when he was made Head Boy. If he saved Snape's life in some way, Dumbledore and others would have seen that he was capable of putting the welfare of someone he hated ahead of his feelings toward that person. To me, that would be a good recommendation for a position of leadership. Ravenclaw Bookworm From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 03:27:15 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 03:27:15 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius ( Prank and Life Debts) LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127220 Ravenclaw Bookworm wrote: > > > What we know is that Dumbledore told Harry that James had saved Severus' life. We have assumed he referred to the Prank, because Severus keeps accusing Sirius of trying to murder him. Is it possible we are being fooled - that this isn't the event Dumbledore referred to? Could there have been another time when James really did save Severus' life - from a real threat and not a prank? Marianne: <> Oh. Well. That would be a kicker, wouldn't it? Let's say you're right, and the James/Severus life debt arose from some other incident. Snape still thinks in PoA that Sirius tried, at the age of 16, to kill him (Snape). So does this mean that in addition to our much-discussed Prank, there was another instance when Sirius said or did something to lead Snape into potential mortal danger? Geez, if that's the case, no wonder Snape still has that giant chip labeled "Black" on his shoulder! Alla: I am a little stunned too, Bookworm and Marianne. Yes, that would effectively make Prank a non-issue, but then it would beg more questions, wouldn't it? Let's look at Snape's tirade and Dumbledore response again. "Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age sixteen," he breathed. "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? you haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?" "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said Dumbledore quietly" - POA, p.391 It seems that Snape believes that Sirius tried to kill him only once , but now I do wonder whether he was sixteen at the time of the prank or not. I also still wonder what may Dumbledore's response mean. What DOES he remember? Marianne And, if JKR had led us astray, and there is still this hidden incident, then perhaps that leads support to those who have postulated that we've made too much of the Prank because Remus seems to hold no lasting outrage or anger towards Sirius over how the potential lethal outcome would have affected Werewolf!Remus. Alla: Yep, Remus sure does not seem to be very upset in the Shack, doesn't he? I thought about something else, when I was rereading this chapter, which we discussed one million times or more. :) Look at the Prank account by Remus "We were in the same year, you know, and we - er - didn't like each other very much. He especially disliked James. Jealous, I think, of James' talent on the Quidditch field... anyway Snape had seen me crossing on the grounds with Madam Pomfrey one evening as she led me toward the Whomping Willow to transform . Sirius thought it would be - er- amusing, to tell Snape all he had to do was prod the knot on the treee trunk with a long stick, and he'd be able to get in after me. Well, of course , Snape tried it - if he'd got as far as this house, he'd have met a fully grown werewolf - but your father, who'd heard what Sirius had done, went after Snape and pulled him back, at great risk to his life... Snape glimpsed me , though, at the end of the tunnel. He was forbidden by Dumbledore to tell anybody, but from that time on he knew what I was..." - PoA, p.357 OK, couple of things. To me dots after "Jealous of Quidditch talent" may indicate that there is something else Snape could have been jealous of James. Lily? Something or somebody totally unknown yet? Another thing - Remus does not say that Sirius told Snape how to get there. He says Sirius THOUGHT it would be amusing to tell Snape how to get to the Shack. Now, obviously Sirius told it to somebody, but I am more and more thinking that that SOMEBODY was not Snape. I mean I totally accept the possibility of staged conversation and Sirius making sure that Snape overhears it, but I also see the possibility that Sirius was running his mouth to Peter or even to Lily about how amusing it will be and did not see Snape overhearing them. Remus also says that James heard that Sirius done and went there. Who told him that? Sirius himself ? Possible. Or may be that other person, who saw Snape going to the Shack and putting two and two together? By the way, if it was a full moon , why James and Sirius were not with Remus yet, when Snape came? Another outlandish speculation , which builds on the speculation that Snape figured out who Remus was prior to going to the Shack. Could it be that Snape wanted to try and see if he can win fight with werewolf for some unknown reason? Maybe somebody in his family got bitten and Snape wanted to see whether he is strong enough to win the fight? Marianne: OTOH, it would almost strike me as being a bit over-the-top for JKR to now have to introduce a second major incident. Unless she's never going to clear it all up for us, which I would find highly unsatisfactory. Alla: You may be right in a sense that it IS Harry's story and maybe JKR won't want to complicate the backstory even more, but no, no, no, she will clear it for us. She promised after all. :-) Just my opinion, Alla, who really really wants to read HBP now and book 7 very shortly after. From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 7 03:33:08 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 03:33:08 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127221 Alla wrote: > snip > For that reason ( holes in the story) I am very reluctant to say that > Sirius planned to kill Snape. I don't see it as supported in the text > yet, that is all. I am not saying that Sirius did a good deed, not at > all, but I don't exclude the possibility that Prank was somebode > else's setup. > > Again, sorry for repeating myself , but surely Sirius and Snape did > not like each other way before Prank happened, right? JKR did say > that they loathed each other, so why stop and have a chat with each > other? Why, why, why? > > Can someone give me a realistic speculation of mechanics of the > Prank, because right now it is very hard for me to imagine. > snip Potioncat: Canon SS/PS chapter 17 DD says that Severus and James detested each other and James saved Severus' life. He goes on to say, "Funny the way people's minds work, isn't it? Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt...I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father even." PoA chapter 14 Snape says, "And did the headmaster tell you the circumstances in which your father saved my life?..." "...your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't gotten cold feet at the last moment..." PoA chapter 18 Lupin speaking he talks about the dislike between Snape and the Marauders. "You see, Sirius here played a trick on him that nearly killed him, a trick which involved me."... ..."It served him right." Black sneered. Lupin goes on to say that Snape had seen Pomfrey take him to the whomping willow one evening. "Sirius thought it would be--er-amusing to tell Snape all he had to do was prod the tree trunk with a long stick and he'd be able to get in after me. Well of course, Snape tried it..." "...but your father who'd heard what Sirius had done went after Snape and pulled him back, at great risk to his life." back to Potioncat: So both Severus and James were at risk for being killed. This from Snape, Dumbledore and Lupin. Lupin says Sirius told Snape. Sirius doesn't deny it. In fact, it's said twice that it was Sirius who played the joke on Severus. It isn't clear to me if all this happened one evening. That is, Snape knew Lupin was going somewhere each month, but on this evening Snape saw Pomfrey and Lupin crossing the lawn to the tree. Sirius tells him how to get in. James hears about it apparantly after Snape goes in, or at least, after Sirius tells Snape. James goes after him. It seems to me that neither Remus nor James knew about the joke before hand. Snape either has reason to think they knew about it, or simply suspects they knew. What was the circumstance in which Sirius told Snape? And how did he manage it in such a way that Snape went after Lupin? Did Snape have any suspicion that Lupin was a werewolf? I'm not sure if Pomfrey went into the tunnel with Lupin. If she did, Snape may have thought it was safe to follow. If we believe Sirius was an impulsive teenager, why can't we also accept Severus as a teenager? Even if he was less impulsive than Sirius, that leaves a lot of room for impulsivity. Perhaps Sirius, at his most charming, was offering a payback for the rude treatment he'd given Severus earlier that week? (OWLs) or maybe this happens early 6th year. I'm not sure if we'll get more details to this event. But it seems clear that Sirius tricked Severus into going into the tunnel beneath the whomping willow after Remus. That Severus could have been killed and that James risked his life to save Severus. Dumbledore seems to think Severus could have been killed, yet he does not seem to hold it against Sirius the way Severus does. Severus seems to accept that James could have been killed,too, but atributes a different motive to the act of courage. I know I didn't answer the "how" but did this help at all? Potioncat From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 7 04:08:29 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 04:08:29 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127222 Potioncat (quoting): Canon SS/PS chapter 17 DD says that Severus and James detested each other and James saved Severus' life. He goes on to say, "Funny the way people's minds work, isn't it? Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt...I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father even." PoA chapter 14 Snape says, "And did the headmaster tell you the circumstances in which your father saved my life?..." "...your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't gotten cold feet at the last moment..." Bookworm: Oops, I'd forgotten that 2nd quote. I guess that kills my budding theory. Oh, well, it was fun for a while... Ravenclaw Bookworm From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 04:24:29 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 04:24:29 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127223 Alla wrote: > > snip For that reason ( holes in the story) I am very reluctant to say that Sirius planned to kill Snape. I don't see it as supported in the text yet, that is all. I am not saying that Sirius did a good deed, not at all, but I don't exclude the possibility that Prank was somebode else's setup. Again, sorry for repeating myself , but surely Sirius and Snape did not like each other way before Prank happened, right? JKR did say that they loathed each other, so why stop and have a chat with each other? Why, why, why? Potioncat: Canon SS/PS chapter 17 DD says that Severus and James detested each other and James saved Severus' life. He goes on to say, "Funny the way people's minds work, isn't it? Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt...I do believe he worked so hard to protect you this year because he felt that would make him and your father even." Alla: Hey! Our posts crossed in the mid air. :o) Yes, this is canon for James's saving Snape's life. It is just Bookworm got me thinking about when did it happen, but most likely I am just complicating and overanalysing things now. In any event - what MAINLY bugs me is the backstory of the Prank itself. Potioncat: PoA chapter 14 Snape says, "And did the headmaster tell you the circumstances in which your father saved my life?..." "...your saintly father and his friends played a highly amusing joke on me that would have resulted in my death if your father hadn't gotten cold feet at the last moment..." Alla: That IS a great canon for James saving Snape life during the Prank too. Potioncat: PoA chapter 18 Lupin speaking he talks about the dislike between Snape and the Marauders. "You see, Sirius here played a trick on him that nearly killed him, a trick which involved me."... ..."It served him right." Black sneered. Alla: Again, I am in a VERY speculative mood today ( hopefully canon based, but still speculative). If Snape knew who Remus was before hand and Remus did not, surely Remus would overestimate the danger then, right? > back to Potioncat: > So both Severus and James were at risk for being killed. This from > Snape, Dumbledore and Lupin. Alla: I would say from Snape and Lupin, right? Dumbledore does not say when James saved Severus' life. Potioncat: It seems to me that neither Remus nor James knew about the joke before hand. Snape either has reason to think they knew about it, or simply suspects they knew. Alla: I would agree, but then it again leaves us with Peter and Lily, since someone had to tell James about what Sirius did Potioncat What was the circumstance in which Sirius told Snape? And how did he manage it in such a way that Snape went after Lupin? Did Snape have any suspicion that Lupin was a werewolf? I'm not sure if Pomfrey went into the tunnel with Lupin. If she did, Snape may have thought it was safe to follow. Alla: Yes, those questions really bug me too. :o) VERY interesting idea about Pomfrey though. Especially in light of your idea that it did not happen during one evening. Severus got the info one day and went in on another? Potioncat: If we believe Sirius was an impulsive teenager, why can't we also accept Severus as a teenager? Even if he was less impulsive than Sirius, that leaves a lot of room for impulsivity. Perhaps Sirius, at his most charming, was offering a payback for the rude treatment he'd given Severus earlier that week? (OWLs) or maybe this happens early 6th year. Alla: Sure, I can see Snape having some kind of impulsivity. What I don't see unfortunately is him believing anything Sirius says, especially if it concerns another person, whose secret Sirius and James are protecting. I am just not sure that Sirius will be THAT eager to talk with Snape about Remus. I am also not sure that Severus will believe any nice things coming from Sirius. Sorry! Potioncat: I know I didn't answer the "how" but did this help at all? Alla: You gave me some new food for thought and very interesting one, but I am afraid my questions are still here. :o) Thanks. JMO Alla, who does not think that this post of hers is very coherent because of the lateness of the hour. :o) From saunya at tampabay.rr.com Wed Apr 6 13:20:18 2005 From: saunya at tampabay.rr.com (saunya) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 09:20:18 -0400 Subject: Mixing the Magical and Muggle Worlds References: Message-ID: <001401c53aab$60bc77f0$b43ca418@voltron> No: HPFGUIDX 127224 > Richard Jones said: > I'm confused by the apparent lack of knowledge of the Muggle > world by witches and wizards. > Bonnie: > I think the WW is as oblivious of the Muggles as the Muggles > are of the WW. Maybe they (we?) are all going around with our > heads in the sand. :) Hi, I'm new...as for the wizarding/muggleword ignorance- I suppose it's no different than knowing very little about different cultures in your own city- multiculturalism abounds right in our own sphere of influence, yet many of us still rely on stereotypes rather than fact for information. Just a thought- great list, by the way- I'm definitely enjoying the conversations. saunya From Orcmarauder at aol.com Wed Apr 6 14:43:50 2005 From: Orcmarauder at aol.com (Orcmarauder at aol.com) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 10:43:50 EDT Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? Message-ID: <190.3d463184.2f854fa6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127225 Chancie writes: > does anyone think the current owner of the Riddle house > is important? Or have any guesses as to who he/she is? I think I know. Lucius Malfoy. "Orcmarauder" From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 14:49:47 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 14:49:47 -0000 Subject: Whither Harry? (was Re: Whither Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127226 Naama: > Snape consistently has been the one person that brings out > the worst out of Harry - anger, rudeness, baseless suspicions, > stubborness, etc. It's kind of fitting that he will be the one > that will bring Harry to his lowest moral point of his life. Isn't he just giving Harry the treatment that any DE would? (Maybe just a bit more kind though.) I wonder if he does it on purpose. Chys From mfterman at yahoo.com Wed Apr 6 18:14:22 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 18:14:22 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127227 Ron is destined for a career in the Ministry, the same as his dad. Whatever else he thinks, he's going to end up going there. It is his destiny. He's not cut out to be an Auror. He's really more suited for entering the Wizarding bureacracy and working his way up through the ranks, especially with Hermione driving his career along. "mfterman" From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 05:41:49 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 05:41:49 -0000 Subject: Snape vs. Sirius ( Prank and Life Debts) LONG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127228 > Alla: > Another thing - Remus does not say that Sirius told Snape how to get > there. He says Sirius THOUGHT it would be amusing to tell Snape how > to get to the Shack. Now, obviously Sirius told it to somebody, but > I am more and more thinking that that SOMEBODY was not Snape. > > I mean I totally accept the possibility of staged conversation and > Sirius making sure that Snape overhears it, but I also see the > possibility that Sirius was running his mouth to Peter or even to > Lily about how amusing it will be and did not see Snape overhearing > them. Finwitch: Indeed. I think that Sirius discussed that with Remus after the Pensieve scene - 'Wish it was full moon' - and all that. As Snape was getting Remus' secret from the exam... Remus talked him out of it, I believe. However, I do think Sirius talked about it with someone - (not James, as he 'heard' it) - and Snape just happened to overhear it. I find Peter as the most likely person. Not Remus (he was in the shack) and I doubt Sirius would be talking to Lily if James wasn't there - unless he was acting as some sort of spokesman. Alla: > Remus also says that James heard that Sirius done and went there. > Who told him that? Sirius himself ? Possible. Or may be that other > person, who saw Snape going to the Shack and putting two and two > together? > By the way, if it was a full moon , why James and Sirius were not > with Remus yet, when Snape came? Finwitch: I see it depending upon just whom Sirius was talking to. If he was talking to Peter - then it was Sirius telling James. (with the Two-Way Mirror). If that's the case, James was either with Remus (likely) or having a date with Lily... and in that case, Peter was in the infirmary. Or quite possibly, serving a detention with Sirius and Snape. On the Other hand, if Sirius was acting as a spokesman on James' behalf, telling Lily the whole animagus/werewolf-thing (showing what a great friend James is, taking all that trouble for Moony) - about his own disgraceful family and his plans of leaving them and go live with the Potters (another act of a true friend) - and then, Lily sees Snape enter the shack behind Lupin later - (James waiting for her for a romantic Moonlight-walk or something, should Sirius be successful) now, I bet Lily was impressed for James saving Snape... (but of course, Snape would think that it was a setup!) Of course, Sirius and Peter would have been with Remus. Either way, *James* wasn't there because he wanted to have Moonlight date with Lily! Alla: > Another outlandish speculation , which builds on the speculation > that Snape figured out who Remus was prior to going to the Shack. > > Could it be that Snape wanted to try and see if he can win fight > with werewolf for some unknown reason? Maybe somebody in his family > got bitten and Snape wanted to see whether he is strong enough to > win the fight? Finwitch: Or he wanted to commit suicide using Remus as a tool -- because that would get him what he wanted: James&Sirius&Remus at least expelled, Remus probably executed. Finwitch From jaanise at hello.lv Wed Apr 6 18:41:57 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Wed, 6 Apr 2005 21:41:57 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <001201c53ad8$529f84a0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 127229 -----Original Message----- From: Marcela Perhaps his line of thinking is that he wants to fit in, match up to his two best friends, and therefore he chooses same career as them (though we don't know about Hermione's yet.) -------------------------- Janis: I agree that we *don't* know about Hermione's choice, yet. So, we cannot talk about Ron choosing the same or another career as *them*. I personally think that Hermione will get envolved into muggle- born wizard and not-wizard beings' (like elfs, trolls etc.) rights and things like that. Fighter for observance of human rights in our terms. ------ Marcela ------ She made Ron a Prefect and a Keeper, two things that he hoped for but never expected. --------------------- Jaanis: I didn't have an idea for Ron's choice but now when you mention it, he may go for playing Quidditch. :) In spite of his confidence problems on the field. From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 01:41:31 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 01:41:31 -0000 Subject: Dudley and the Dementors Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127230 I messed up on this last night so I'm trying again. Didn't JKR somewhere say that we will find out exactly what Dudley saw during the dementor attack in OOTP? Well I've been thinking. :) Wouldn't it be great if Dudley and Harry sit down and have a nice long chat and Dudley acknowledges that Harry saved his life. Dudley is so grateful that he becomes a great friend of Harry's. Or maybe not. Okay then, how do you suppose we are going to find out exactly what Dudley saw during the dementor attack? We know in HBP Harry will have his shortest stay yet at the Dursleys, but that doesn't mean it will be an uneventful stay. I can imagine Harry is going to be very sober pondering the Prophecy and the loss of Sirius. At some point Dudley must be going to reveal exactly what he saw. Hmmmm. Bonnie From ginny343 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 01:15:54 2005 From: ginny343 at yahoo.com (ginny343) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 01:15:54 -0000 Subject: Is your Patronus the same as your Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127231 Greenfirespike wrote: > I believe that a character's Patronus will take the same > shape as her/his Animagus. While we no conclusive evidence > via canon, because we have only been privy to either a > character's Patronus or Animagus, it appears they derive > from the same internal thing. > > Look for example at Jo's comments made on March 4, 2004; > when asked if a person can choose what animal you become > when you turn into an Animagus, Rowling replied "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." Ginny343: I have been away for a few days, but I think I have hit all the related posts and I haven't seen this brought up. During the same chat quoted above, another question was asked about animagi. Someone asked JKR which animal she would be if she became an animagus. She replied, "I gave Hermione my idea animagus, because it's my favourite animal. You'll find the answer in the Room of Requirement, Order of the Phoenix!" (I think that should be "ideal" not "idea", but I'm quoting directly.) However, we see Hermione's patronus (an otter) in the Room of Requirement, not her transformed as an animagus. This leads me to believe JKR means for them to be one in the same. On the other hand, I liked the point made that Harry and his father seem to have very different personalities, which makes it hard to believe they would have the same patronus/animagus. That leads me to wonder what Harry might have been like if he had grown up as a "normal" wizard, in the wizarding community, knowing all his life that he was a wizard. Or what he might have been like, if being famous Harry Potter, he had grown up in the wizarding community with everyone looking to him as something special. Would either of those situations have caused him to act more like James when he is at Hogwarts? Would James have still be the show-off he was if he had grown up in the situation Harry did? I somehow think that if Harry and James had both lived and grown old together, father and son would find their personalities really is very similar. Or maybe Lily's kindness is something Harry inherited that makes him different from James . . . and somehow that doesn't affect his patronus/animagus. Just an observation and some thoughts. :)Ginny343 From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 05:17:13 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 05:17:13 -0000 Subject: Snape vs Sirius Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127232 So maybe what happened was this: Snape was very curious, but really had no idea there was a werewolf involved. He just was dying to get something on the Marauders, because for some reason they really hated each other. So Snape sees Madam Pomfrey taking Lupin into the tunnel under the Whomping Willow and is dying to follow. Sirius jokingly tells him how, or Snape overhears it somehow. Because Snape's main feelings at this time are curiosity and revenge, and because he is overconfident and totally unaware of the werewolf angle, he follows. Remember he was "deeply involved in the dark arts". I can see him being overconfident. Remember this is before his (Snape's) experience with the DE team and his turning back to the Orders side. Perhaps he thought "whatever they are up to I can handle, maybe Lupin is sick, if Madaam Pomfrey is with him I'll just follow and see what's up. Then I can give Lupin a bad time about whatever it is he's hiding." In his wildest dreams would he ever believe DD would allow someone so dangerous at Hogwarts. I just can't see Snape following if he suspected or knew Lupin was a werewolf. Sirius (himself) either underestimated the danger or being familiar with the situation figured Snape would somehow escape. After all, if Snape gets bit he won't be any worse off than Lupin (who is one of Sirius' best friends). I can see Sirius, not being a werewolf himself so not knowing what it's actually like, not taking the whole illness as seriously as he should. To him and James the full moon was a time for new adventures. Lupin was just grateful to have friends to help him get through the nightmare. My experienc of lads this age (pardon me if there are some out there) is that they sort of think they are immortal. Bonnie - just trying to picture the whole thing. From docmara at comcast.net Thu Apr 7 04:07:32 2005 From: docmara at comcast.net (docmara1) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 04:07:32 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127233 >>SSSusan: > > >Well, let me refer you to this part of the essay again: > "In order to sustain their exaggeratedly positive self-views, > narcissists constantly seek external self-validation in the > form of attention & admiration from others . When threatened, > narcissists respond with intensely negative emotions.... > Furthermore, narcissists respond to ego threat with aggression > against others."< > > Betsy: > But I don't really recall Snape looking for validation in > others. He doesn't seem to be gunning for wide-ranging > approval, attention, or admiration. Lockhart, on the other > hand... :) > > >>SSSusan: > >Think of the end of PoA and Snape's incredible ranting & raging > after Sirius escaped. He was apopleptic! Unless you buy into > OscarWinner!Snape, that was genuine rage and (as DD categorized > it) disappointment.< Hi all, lurker back again :) I want to weigh in in support of narcissistic!Snape. IMO, the way that Snape interacts with others reflects the fragility and grandiosity that you typically see in Narcissism. The narcissistic rage (the ranting and raving, insulting others, being aggressive) is an effort to protect himself against the injury that he feels when he feels dismissed, insulted or attacked. Narcissists don't necessarily look for global approval from others. Idealization -- being idealized and/or idealizing someone who feels positively about you ("you are perfect and I am part of you") is a big part of the narcissistic dynamic. Also characteristic is the lack of empathy and difficulty seeing someone else's point of view. That, coupled with grandiosity and sensitivity to injury makes for a very brittle character. It's not that narcissists never do good things, or that they can't sometimes be empathic -- they can also have their moments, often when they're getting enough "supplies" of what they need. Snape responds with rage even to injury that has only occured inside his own perception. His reaction to Harry on the first day of school is a good example of this. Harry hadn't done anything at all, but his presence, his resemblance to James, what Snape may have known about Harry's stature in the wizarding world...all of this probably felt to him like being overshadowed -- and by a child. Being in a position to teach Harry occlumency is a mixed bag for someone like Snape. On the one hand, his superior skill is acknowledged by DD. On the other hand, he is faced with Harry's "specialness" at every lesson, and Harry's defiance and resistance is an implicit rejection of *Snape's* specialness. The reason that Snape can accept some gentle rebukes from Dumbledore, I think, is that DD is very, very empathic. His empathy and mirroring of Snape, even when he is redirecting or correcting him, allows Snape to tolerate this. Also, I suspect that Snape idealizes DD. Being near the person that he idealizes - and having that person choose him, protect him, stand up for him -- this provides a sort of cushion that keeps Snape from being as brittle with DD as he is with others. As for narcissistic!Lockhart... There are some narcissists who are very charming. Lockhart is a more socially skilled narcissist than Snape (who favors the jackhammer and axe as tools ;-p), and a much more devious, ruthless one, in some ways. Though Snape has the more evil, ominous persona, Lockhart has more sociopathic tendencies -- trying to obliviate a couple of teenagers -- yikes! Protecting himself is always put far above any other considerations, no matter the cost. He made up a history and life for himself, treading on others to do it. For as cruel and aggressive as Snape can be, he also is willing to take some risks for others. It's possible that the sacrifices he makes as a spy (not to mention the risks he takes) are at least in part for the gratification he gets from DD's appreciation and admiration of his courage and skill. It's not everybody's approval that he needs (unlike Lockhart who probably wouldn't have stopped until he'd signed a picture for every wizard on the planet ;-p), Snape longs for very specific approval and admiration. Finally, I think that it's important to note that while Harry can also be narcissistic -- this is really age-appropriate for him. Teenagers are egocentric, but that's part of their developmental path. Narcissists get stuck (much earlier than teen years, incidentally, but stuck nonetheless). Harry is likely to develop and move through this stage... If I had to choose which of the two adults I'd rather see in my office -- I'd actually choose Snape, I think. Lockhart would be very, very hard to treat. Hope I did the snipping right...and that this made some sort of sense :) Mara From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 06:35:01 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 06:35:01 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice - Perspectives In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127234 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > Hannah: > > ...edited... > > I agree that Ron is unlikely to become an Auror, for the part of the > reason you give. It's not that Ron isn't capable, it's just that > he'll eventually realise that it's not actually what he wants to > do. ...edited... > > I don't think it will be a case of Ron 'not measuring up.' ... > I doubt JKR will add on failing at Auror training as well. ... I > think Ron will make his own decision about a career, without > worrying about what others think. That is what Ron needs to learn > to do. > > Just my opinion > > Hannah bboyminn: I think I do get your point about Ron changing his mind. Recently in an unrelated post I used an illustration of an 11 year old who wanted to be either an astronaut or drive an ice cream truck; he was still undecided. What I hear you saying is that right now Ron has a very childish (or somewhat childish) romantic notion of what an Auror is. Once he matures a bit, and comes face-to-face with the hard training, and daily routine and drudgery involved, it won't quite seem so appealing. It's like the illustrated kid coming to the realization that driving an ice cream truck means you have to sell the ice cream, you don't get to eat it all. And, I agree that your basic premise is true, and further agree that it may indeed go the way you suggest, but there is one very important thing that needs to be considered. By the time Ron is 18, he will have faced more Dark Arts and Dark Wizards, and pulled himself out of more dark and dangerous scrapes than many Aurors who have been on the job for years, and that will count for something. I don't think it's strictly a matter of grades and classes, experience and demonstrated skill count for something. Certainly, that is much more true in Harry's case, but it still applies to Ron, who again I note, will have gone through and accomplished a lot before this is all over. Given all this, I think there is a chance that they could both become Aurors with somewhat limited academics overcome by demonstrated ability and experience. All that said, I would add that given the stress and trama, as well as physical and emotional wounds they will both (Harry/Ron) experience before the Dark Lord is defeated, they may very well have had their fill of danger and adventure, and long for a quiet safe life. If they follow that route, I suspect they could both get jobs with Fred and George. (something I've commented on previously and extensively.) Just thinking out loud. Steve/bboyminn From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 06:41:21 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 06:41:21 -0000 Subject: Dudley and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127235 Bonnie: > > Okay then, how do you suppose we are going to find out exactly what > Dudley saw during the dementor attack? We know in HBP Harry will > have his shortest stay yet at the Dursleys, but that doesn't mean it > will be an uneventful stay. I can imagine Harry is going to be very > sober pondering the Prophecy and the loss of Sirius. At some point > Dudley must be going to reveal exactly what he saw. Hmmmm. Finwitch: Simple. Harry (who spends LEAST amount of time with Dursleys in HBP) finds out in the last book. That means, after a year of education. Now, Harry began Occlumency studies (which is a power that is a possibly Voldy-transfer) - BUT: Voldemort is a Legilemens, too. I wouldn't put it past Dumbledore (who can do both) to teach Harry Occlumency (he most definately will do it himself now) AND Legilimency. Harry DOES have this ability, because - much like Parseltongue - he got it from Voldemort. Now all that remains is Harry learning how to use it. This will happen troughout HBP. In the seventh book - early seventh book - Harry will find out everything he can from the Dursleys. Being Legilimens, he won't bother asking questions (which wouldn't get him any answers, as Harry has known all his life) - but use Legilimency on them. I don't remember where I read it, but it there was JKR saying which do we want: Harry defeating Dursleys or Harry being happy (leaving them for Sirius?). She's made her choice about that. You know, all in all - as much as I'd like to see that poor kid get some happiness - defeating Dursleys makes a better story. AND I think that confronting them is actually best for Harry - dealing with his past so he can truly be over it. Finwitch From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 06:59:12 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 06:59:12 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127236 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mfterman" wrote: > > Ron is destined for a career in the Ministry, the same as his > dad. Whatever else he thinks, he's going to end up going there. > It is his destiny. He's not cut out to be an Auror. He's really > more suited for entering the Wizarding bureacracy and working > his way up through the ranks, especially with Hermione driving > his career along. > > "mfterman" bboyminn: Well, I do get your point, but let's not forget that Aurors are part of the Ministry. I suspect they are at the top of Magical Law Enforcement; sort of the criminal division vs the civil division of law enforcement. >From a career as an Auror, then into an administrative position, Ron could work his way up to Department Head, and even with luck to a Junior Minister position. What I hear you saying, is that Ron would either start in an administrative position, or start in Law Enforcement but not as an Auror, and work his way up from there. That's a very possible speculation, personally Auror seems like a much more fun starting point, but I wonder (as I've pointed out elsewhere in this thread) if Ron will have had his fill of Dark Wizard fighting, danger and adventure by the time Voldemort is defeated, and will as you suggest then want something a little more tame. Just thinking out loud. Steve/bboyminn From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Thu Apr 7 07:14:47 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 07:14:47 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127237 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > > Alla wrote: > > > Again, sorry for repeating myself , but surely Sirius and Snape did > not like each other way before Prank happened, right? JKR did say > that they loathed each other, so why stop and have a chat with each > other? Why, why, why? > > Potioncat: > > I know I didn't answer the "how" but did this help at all? > > > Alla: > > You gave me some new food for thought and very interesting one, > but I am afraid my questions are still here. :o) > > Thanks. Valky: Hi Alla, I imagine the prank without holes, and let me just embellish the scenario for you and see if it works. Dumbledore said that Snape and James were a bit like Harry and Draco, so lets for a moment allow the assumption that in this description Dumbledore referred to a particular element (among many of course) of the Harry/Draco relationship that we know: They got each other into trouble. Canon supports this: 'Snivellus' is one thing that supports an assumption that Snape caused trouble for the Marauders, then there is Sirius saying that Snape had tried to get them expelled (just for a moment imagine what Draco would do if he was trying to get Harry expelled.. angry?) So I think it's safe to assume that on the evening of the Prank Snape had actually done a specific something to get the Marauders in to strife.. Perhaps this thing had resulted in an evening detention for Sirius. You know how Sirius loves his midnight romps with the werewolf, so it's easy to imagine why he would be angry at not being able to go. So here we are before the sun goes down, Sirius is brooding about not being able to go out with his mates that night and sitting alone near the tree. Snape sees the marauders before hand doing something together that he imagines to be plotting, but they are probably just deciding to surprise Sirius with some silly joke to cheer him up, Snape doesn't know this obviously and forgets what he's seen for now. Then as Snape is standing watching Remus go to the Willow with a look of curiosity on his face, Sirius who had been brooding all this time decides to get even with Snape and get him in trouble so he sidles up to little Sevvie says "Prod the knot with a stick" and walks off gleefully thinking Severus will be joining him in detention tomorrow night when he gets caught out of bed trying to snoop (serve him right)... Later that evening he tells James that he let Snape know how to get in so he'll be getting 'his' soon enough.. James goes white and says No Sirius, he will be Killed! This is where Sirius gets stubborn and doesn't want to admit he never thought of that.. James says we have to stop him, Sirius says If you want to take his side then go ahead but count me out. James goes alone to drag Sevvie back, and Snape assumes that James got cold feet at the last minute and that it was all a plot to get him killed (aha he remembers what he saw earlier!). So there is my un-holey (<<--bad pun) version of the prank.. and its canon safe, I am sure.. Valky From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 09:05:16 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 09:05:16 -0000 Subject: Whither Harry? (was Re: Whither Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127238 > Naama: > > I don't know whether Harry will cause a disaster, but I certainly > agree with Pippin that JKR has set up the story for a huge clash > between Harry and Snape. Harry blames (irrationaly) Snape for Sirius' > death. This death has already caused him to cast an Unforgivable - > feeble though it may have been. In GoF, Harry fantasises of Crucio- > ing Snape. > All this, for me, builds towards Harry casting an Unforgivable curse > on Snape. This time, successfuly. > Thoughts? Finwitch: Well, Harry did NOT, strictly speaking, cast the curse, since nothing happened. And, as no spell left his wand, it is questionable whether Harry is guilty of attempt (which could be defined as a spell that did leave the wand but backfired or missed the target). He is, however, guilty of INTENT. (and would require a bit of parental scolding, but no such person knows!) Still, Harry fantazising/imagining about something bad on Snape is a stress-relief - (Snape tortured, Snape drowning in a cauldron) - fine. Just don't let it become *reality*. And Harry's Intent was, IMO, bad enough. Is he going to DO it in the next book? Try it on Dudley? Or Vernon? Well-- I don't think Harry has it in himself to actually DO it. At least I hope so. However, I do see him doing Legilemency on Dursleys, wanting to know what Duddykins saw/heard when Dementors came. Or Petunia, who'se obviously hiding things from him... I think Harry DOES have ability to do Legilimens - he trusts Sirius like he does none other. Why? Because Sirius has NEVER lied to him, or even actively kept secrets from him. Much like Harry trusting Hagrid in Philosopher's Stone. Dursleys lied; Hagrid told the truth. Dursleys didn't care if Harry was freezing without a blanket; Hagrid lends his own jacket for Harry to coddle in... He knew that Dobby told him the truth. (how? IS this Harry's version of Voldemort's ability to detect lies - to tell if someone's being HONEST with him?) He knew Hagrid did. Harry doesn't trust Snape partly because Snape blocks out some response Harry would expect to get from an honest person. Note that Harry even doubted Dumbledore's honesty about the socks. (Still, Harry excuses Dumbledore: it was personal, private question). Sirius is no Occlumens - and even if he were, Harry can always get that 'I have no secrets from you' - from him. He may have actually gained the truth about Quirrell (the dream) but - he logics it off and pays no heed. Most likely, as he was sitting there, with the stairs. I think it was the fact that Snape blocked, whereas Crouch Jr. was REALLY trying to help Harry to achieve what Harry wanted to achieve (albeit in order to harm Harry...) Harry got the Legilimensed thought, "I won't blame you"; "I will assist you to win"; "I won't punish you"; or some such from Crouch Jr, because that WAS his goal of the moment - and Harry had to make his decision fast, so he's not going to wonder *why* the Moody!Crouch is out to help him - he's already gained a suitable reason - his assistance to Cedric, and the Goblet. Note that Crouch Jr. never LIED in front of Harry, but it was his reasons which Harry *thought* he already knew that were the key to his viciousness. Precisely the way he managed to fool Dumbledore. He did tell the truth about the Goblet... And Harry could, effectively, sense Sirius' honesty in PoA. The reason Harry doesn't trust Snape is because Snape never lets his guard down around Harry. Dumbledore, I believe, does to some extent. (but not enough for Harry to trust him completely). I think that when Dumbledore spoke to Harry for the AFTERMATH-EXPLANATION, he did let his guard down to convince Harry. He scans Harry occasionally while asking the question (did you do it) or more gently (anything you'd like to tell me?). I believe that when Dumbledore told Harry to 'study Occlumency and do everything professor Snape told him' - he forgot to let his Occlumency guard down. So, Harry didn't trust him. Maybe a part of Harry doubted it was *really* Dumbledore, because AD had *always* let his guard down for him before. Sirius, OTOH, is *completely* open with Harry, unless he's under orders not to reveal something (and even so, *he* wanted to tell Harry, and probably would have if Molly hadn't been there..). Even as far as to tell Harry his extra-secure Vault Number. The one thing he doesn't tell Harry is his location but even so, he explains it's because the letter could end up in wrong hands... In other words, Sirius is *constantly* giving out a heart-felt message: "I have no secrets from you, Harry. I would gladly tell *you* everything, if circumstances allow me...". Harry's lived with Dursleys who kept him the fact he was a wizard; lied to him how his parents lied; Harry didn't trust those who lied to him. (Quirrell didn't lie, either, I believe. He just wasn't telling everything, and had that stutter to provide a reason.) Harry won't trust those who keep secrets from him, not since Crouch Jr. I suppose. In OOP, the only one who was as open with him as possible and insisted that others were as well, was Sirius. (and Fred&George were *helping* him to find things out, and told him all about their businesses). Oh yes. Sirius, Fred, George (and Lupin when he was there, supporting Sirius). The ones completely open. Ron's more open with Harry (so Harry's more inclined to take his judgement over Hermione's, who keeps secrets and runs into library...). Of course, it's all subconcious, but that's how I see it. Finwitch From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Thu Apr 7 09:37:18 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 17:37:18 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bending the rules in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <1112793619.18174.22198.m30@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112793619.18174.22198.m30@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127239 Emma Hawkes wrote: > I was thinking about the tendency of Arthur Weasley to indulge in > rule bending. There's borrowing the car from work without permission > and there's having Ludo Bagman give his tickets to the quidditch cup. > Any other examples? Meri now, posting quickly after a long sabatical: Was his borrowing the car from work without permission? I assume you're talking about PoA where he and the other Weasleys escorted Harry to King's Cross? I'm pretty sure he called in a favor for those to keep Harry safe from Sirius. And I think he did the same thing (calling in a favor) to get the Quidditch Cup tickets (IIRC he helped Ludo's brother Otto out with some weird ferrets). So that's not bending the rules per se. But his tinkering with the Ford Anglia is certainly extra-legal. Meri Thanks Meri - I knew there were more examples. Thanks. I am working on a brief articles on bribery in the wizarding world (not that I think Arthur Weasley is corrupt). It's for a fundraising fanzine and is needed quite quickly. I will, however, share it with the list as I expect few people on this list are likely to buy a paper copy of a fundraiser for the National Australian Fan Fund. (Though if you are interested, give me a call off list). From ajroald at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 08:04:06 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 08:04:06 -0000 Subject: Dudley and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127240 --- Bonnie wrote: > Didn't JKR somewhere say that we will find out exactly what Dudley > saw during the dementor attack in OOTP? Well I've been thinking. :) > > Wouldn't it be great if Dudley and Harry sit down and have a nice > long chat and Dudley acknowledges that Harry saved his life. > Dudley is so grateful that he becomes a great friend of Harry's. Would Dudley have 'seen' anything? JKR has stated that Muggles can not see the Dementors, nor can squibs. Arabella Figg knew enough about them to know that they were near, but she couldn't see them either. On the train in PoA, Ron only referenced 'feeling' like he'd never be happy again, but it was only Harry that claimed to have heard his mother scream as an effect of the Dementors presence. As for Dudley and Harry becoming friends - wow, wouldn't that be a plot twist! Somehow I doubt Dudley would ever be able to admit that any wizard, let alone Harry, saved his life. Dudley was raised to believe Harry is 'beneath' him, not worthy, and that wizards are lower than pond scum (frog spawn?). ~ Lea From ajroald at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 07:47:49 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 07:47:49 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127241 --- Marcela wrote: > I don't think that Ron really wants to be an Auror because he > likes fighting Dark Arts, but mainly because it sounds "cool" > to him. > kids get some skewed notion of a profession and idealize it. > In all honesty, I don't really think that Ron is cut out to > be an Auror. I understand what you are saying, and even agree that it is unlikely he will follow that career path. However, I am very curious as to why you feel Ron isn't cut out to be an Auror. Will also agree that at the point he makes this career 'decision', it hasn't been well thought through. It is probably an idolized career such as our police or firemen. Ron has proven himself to be a strategist on several occasions. His mastery of the game of chess at 11/12 years of age is impressive (wasn't it Dumbledore that set up that 'safe guard'?). While I will in no way claim to know/understand this game at any advanced level, I know enough to say that to be a good chess player, one must be able to think several moves ahead and absorb several possibilities all at once. IMO, this would be an asset to any Auror. Secondly, once he gained his confidence playing Quidditch, it became nearly impossible to get the quaffle by him. Again, having to anticipate your opponents move and react quickly. He has shown as much (or more) bravery as Harry and Hermione, to the extent of following spiders (his worst fear) into the Forbidden Forest. Nor did he run when presented with monstrous spiders once in there. It sometimes seems that Ron is greatly underestimated (and this HP Fan often wonders if this isn't partially due to the poorly written movie scripts that gives Hermione most of his character defining lines - different topic, sorry). While we do not know for sure, we can surmise that Ron's grades are equal to those of Harry. Especially if one considers that Ron was born into the wizarding world, where Harry (and even Hermione) knew nothing about it until age 11. Although we all know that Dumbledore didn't make Harry a Prefect because he thought he would have enough to handle, Ron must have enough 'redeeming' qualities to be the next choice. He isn't the only other boy in Gryffindor in Harry's year. And lastly, Ron, Harry, and Hermione, by the time they finish Hogwarts (if they survive), have faced danger, death eaters, and survived situations that were not in their favor. Wouldn't this count as something? My personal preference for Ron would be a wizard equivalent to an attorney, stemming from his research and preparation of Buckbeak's appeal in PoA. JKR may just have Ron choose to play Quidditch though. ~ Lea From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 10:42:05 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 10:42:05 -0000 Subject: Snape vs Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127242 Bonnie: > > I just can't see Snape following if he suspected or knew Lupin > was a werewolf. Sirius (himself) either underestimated the danger > or being familiar with the situation figured Snape would somehow > escape. After all, if Snape gets bit he won't be any worse off > than Lupin (who is one of Sirius' best friends). I can see Sirius, > not being a werewolf himself so not knowing what it's actually like, > not taking the whole illness as seriously as he should. To him and > James the full moon was a time for new adventures. Lupin was just > grateful to have friends to help him get through the nightmare. > > My experienc of lads this age (pardon me if there are some out > there) is that they sort of think they are immortal. Finwitch: Statistics state that adolescence is the age when most suicides happen. Most of them, to my knowledge, male. I believe Snape may have been attempting to commit suicide. OR maybe he thought of taking a photo of Lupin's transformation -- or whatever. Silly stunt on his part. But something akin: Since Lupin tells us that his friends being there helped him - I think that werewolves do feel the instinct of a pack, particularly during full Moon. Dogs we know to be pack-animals. while bond of pack is not as strong for stags or rats, both DO move in herds... So in short, the four formed a pack. The bond was strongest to Lupin and Sirius. James was their alpha- the leader, and Sirius the second. Lupin was third and Peter the last. This pack-bond is why Lupin never stood up to Sirius&James - despite Dumbledore trying to give him authority over them. The same works with Ron who just won't go against Fred&George. The twins have elder-brother rule over him - something which is a part of Ron's identity... that of being a Weasley... Particularly important after Percy left. Well, someone said how Sirius came out *empty* - well, I think James' death did that. Lupin and Sirius - well, they BOTH had the same idea: kill the rat who betrayed the pack, and yet, curiously, BOTH concent to let Harry decide. Because James HAD proven Harry's words - that he didn't want his friends to become murderers by saving Snape while putting himself at the risk? Possibly James even said those same words to them - and Harry looking so much like him -- well, it probably seemed to those two as if James himself had spoken... That night, they were a pack again. But I think it's possible their order of dominance has changed. After all, Lupin was giving Sirius orders in the Shack AND in the 12 GP (when Sirius got angry about Molly questioning his authority over Harry) and Sirius does not question that at all. He just obeys. And as much as Sirius objected to Snape teaching Harry occlumency when Lupin was for it, even he's telling Harry to learn it. Interesting change of heart - was it just because of Lupin? Finwitch From vmonte at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 10:49:44 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 10:49:44 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127243 Marcela wrote: She also said that Flamel is dead. There goes one of my candidates for the HBP... So, I believe that one of the famous theories is debunked... Ron is Ron, not Dumbledore. Now, did she laugh at the idea of Hermione and Ron having a son? vmonte responds: I'm really worried about her comment that there are people who will be upset with the ending but that she really wrote the books for herself and had to be true to herself. What could make people so upset? The only thing I can come up with is that she is planning on killing Harry. That would be very upsetting indeed. What do you all think? vmonte http://www.geocities.com/vmonte/ From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 10:52:38 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 10:52:38 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127244 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > That's a very possible speculation, personally Auror seems like a much > more fun starting point, but I wonder (as I've pointed out elsewhere > in this thread) if Ron will have had his fill of Dark Wizard fighting, > danger and adventure by the time Voldemort is defeated, and will as > you suggest then want something a little more tame. Finwitch: Well, I think that as Potions is a requirement for becoming an Auror, whether Ron is in Potions NEWTs will tell us if that is his career of choice. However, he could help his brothers with inventory and such - do the management in Weasley Wizard Wheezes so that Fred and George can devote more time inventing. Or a professional player (Chess or Quidditch) As for Harry - he'll probably be Auror, but since his investment, he always has a place with the twins. Finwitch From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 11:52:38 2005 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 11:52:38 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127245 > vmonte: > > I'm really worried about her comment that there are people who will > be upset with the ending but that she really wrote the books for > herself and had to be true to herself. > > What could make people so upset? The only thing I can come up with > is that she is planning on killing Harry. That would be very > upsetting indeed. What do you all think? Tammy replies: I've been worried for quite awhile that she would kill off Harry. She's been seemingly firm in the idea that 7 books is it - it's her limit. Killing Harry off would most firmly end the Harry Potter series, leaving no room to bring it back. From trekkie at stofanet.dk Thu Apr 7 12:26:56 2005 From: trekkie at stofanet.dk (trekkie) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 14:26:56 +0200 Subject: SV: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section Message-ID: <22d8d274369f26e79f522329cf1f305c@webmail.stofa.dk> No: HPFGUIDX 127246 > > > vmonte: > > > > I'm really worried about her comment that there are people who will > > be upset with the ending but that she really wrote the books for > > herself and had to be true to herself. > > > > What could make people so upset? The only thing I can come up with > > is that she is planning on killing Harry. That would be very > > upsetting indeed. What do you all think? > > > Tammy replies: > > I've been worried for quite awhile that she would kill off Harry. > She's been seemingly firm in the idea that 7 books is it - it's her > limit. Killing Harry off would most firmly end the Harry Potter > series, leaving no room to bring it back. TrekkieGrrrl: As long as she doesn't use the "it was all a dream" I don't care if she kills off Harry. Well, yes of course I do, but it would still be better than a "dream" *shudders* ~Trekkie From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Thu Apr 7 12:32:41 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:32:41 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127247 > --- Marcela wrote: > > I don't think that Ron really wants to be an Auror because he > > likes fighting Dark Arts, but mainly because it sounds "cool" > > to him. > > > kids get some skewed notion of a profession and idealize it. > > In all honesty, I don't really think that Ron is cut out to > > be an Auror. > >Lea replied: > I understand what you are saying, and even agree that it is unlikely > he will follow that career path. However, I am very curious as to > why you feel Ron isn't cut out to be an Auror. > > Will also agree that at the point he makes this career 'decision', it > hasn't been well thought through. It is probably an idolized career > such as our police or firemen. > > My personal preference for Ron would be a wizard equivalent to an > attorney, stemming from his research and preparation of Buckbeak's > appeal in PoA. JKR may just have Ron choose to play Quidditch though. Hannah: I totally agree that Ron is capable of becoming an Auror. He often is underestimated; by fans, by other characters, and of course by himself. But as Lea points out, he's intelligent, talented and brave. In fact, I don't see Harry being any better qualified than Ron is, and no one doubts that Harry could be an Auror. I like the idea of Ron being a broom engineer. This would be practical but still require intelligence, and would enable him to work with something he really loves, namely Quidditch. It also suits what we know about Ron. The broom engineer and designer for a Quidditch team isn't the big star, he's behind the scenes, yet he's totally invalubale and without him the team wouldn't be able to play (OK, I'm making this up, but it stands to reason). That's just the role that Ron has in canon. Although he thinks he wants to be the centre of attention, I reckon that Ron will come to realise that in actual fact, he doesn't want that. He will gain the faith in himself to know that he is important and valued without fame and celebrity to tell him so. Besides, I don't think Ron will want a job that takes over his life (as being an Auror/ Quidditch star must do). He'll want time to spend with his family and friends, to play chess and play/ watch Quidditch and sit in the pub. Nor do I think Ron will want to do the years' of extra studying required to become an Auror. As others have said, Ron is a fifteen year old boy who likes the idea of being an Auror. When he's more mature and understands the reality of it, he will realise that he doesn't want it after all. Not that he isn't good enough. Just that he doesn't want it. Hannah From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 12:33:50 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 12:33:50 -0000 Subject: James and Sirius (was: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127248 > > Alla: > If you are talking about Hogwarts times, then may I submit that we > don't know who was more under whose influence.< > > > Betsy: > I'm going to disagree with you here. In the one scene JKR shows > James and Sirius interacting, James was *most definitely* under > Sirius' influence. The attack on Snape occured because Sirius was > bored and James was looking for a way to entertain him. Even > *Harry* picks up on that. And when he confronts Sirius about it > later, Sirius does not deny it. > > It can be argued that this is just one interaction, but I submit > that when an author has limited time in which to introduce a > character she doesn't waste her precious words by having the > character act *out* of character. Finwitch: Well, I saw it that the hierarchy of Marauders *clearly* put Lupin third and Peter fourth, James and Sirius leading. While James *does* agree to go with Sirius' desire to relief of boredom... Well, was it concenting to a request or submission? James may well have admired Sirius for being ready to desert his family for the right - and Sirius looked upon James for guidance. They may well have alternated dominance - but maybe - after James saved Snape - there was some sort of quarrel between them and James won over. Or maybe Sirius submitted out of gratitude after moving in. Or with James being the Head Boy. (though I doubt that meant anything). Anyway, they were close as twin brothers, like Fred and George. Can anyone say which one has dominance over other twin in twinly matters? Or was that a constant struggle between them? Anyway, I think that James was dominant since after the 'trick' - and then Sirius because he had his own house - and then James because he was married and a father... Interesting thing is that in the SS, Lupin is clearly the leader. Next book, it's between Harry and Sirius and Lupin's nowhere. Fifth book, Lupin tells Sirius to sit down. And Sirius does. I'd say that since the reunion, Lupin has had stable dominance. Finwitch From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 12:57:36 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 05:57:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] So, what is to become of Severus Snape? (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050407125736.79413.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127249 --- lupinlore wrote: > 1) EVER SO EVIL SNAPE > 2) HERO SNAPE > 3) ALL ENDS AGAINST THE MIDDLE SNAPE > 4) DANGEROUSLY TWISTED SNAPE > 5) REDEMPTIVE BUT BITTER AND UNHEROIC SNAPE What all of these theories have in common is that they give Snape a bigger part of the storyline than JKR probably intends. As much as I personally find it incomprehensible, she finds the Trio and pals more interesting than the adults, and all the adults including Snape are important only in that they touch on the Trio's lives and development, especially Harry's. So my prediction is that before the halfway point of Book 7, Snape will die - probably very nastily - and that it will be another Learning Experience For Harry. Details yet to be determined but sometime in Book 6 there will be some kind of incident which Harry will misinterpret and which will not be resolved until after Snape's death when Harry will admit that the git wasn't a completely lousy person (an acknowledgement made easier because Snape isn't around anymore to hear it). Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 13:14:56 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 06:14:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050407131457.69608.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127250 --- katevldz wrote: > > What I don't understand is why some readers readily accept Snape's > interpretation of said > event as being accurate and correct, with little to no > corroboration of his story. I don't > have my books at hand, so I may be forgetting something, but does > anyone else > corroborate Snape's story? Well, we've known since Book 1 that Dumbledore said that James saved Snape's life and by the time we hear the details in POA they corroborate Dumbledore's earlier words. The only wrinkle is that Snape believed that James was in on it but got cold feet instead. Also Snape's emotions when he talks about the incident don't strike me as the response of someone who's consciously lying and therefore there's no reason not to trust his description of the actual events although we're free to doubt his description of the motivations/feelings of James, Sirius et al. And for me personally, since I encountered the character in POA I have always thought that Sirius was a jerk and am more than willing to believe that he was almost criminally thoughtless in setting up the incident. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates. http://personals.yahoo.com From quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 13:15:26 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 13:15:26 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127251 Alla wondered: > Again, sorry for repeating myself , but surely Sirius and Snape did > not like each other way before Prank happened, right? JKR did say > that they loathed each other, so why stop and have a chat with each > other? Why, why, why? Ginger takes a stab: Try this on for size. If you don't like it, toss it in your sock drawer and hand it off to a passing elf. ;o) Imagine: It's the day of the full moon. Sirius and Snape are having a petty arguement after a test in some shared class. It starts with one saying that the other is stupid and the other countering that the first is stupider and so on. Now we get to the good part: Snape: Oh, yeah? You're so stupid you have to ask directions when you trip down the stairs! Sirius: Oh, yeah? You're so stupid you couldn't hit the Willow knot with a 10 foot pole! Snape: What the devil are you rabbiting on about? Sirius: You don't know? You've never even been down there? You've never seen...HAHAHAHA! Wait 'til I tell the guys! Old Snivvie's never even gotten the Willow to stop Whomping! Probably the only guy in the school-of those of us who count for anything, anyway who's never... Hoo-hoo! I must be off. Thank you ever so much for this moment of hilarity. Not that you ever fall short when I need a laughing stock. Snape: Come back here! What knot? What happens when you.. Oh, buggerit. (mutters bracingly) Just you wait, Black. Tonight, I'll know your secret. Well? Plausible? Ginger, hoping everyone doesn't mind mad speculation. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 13:34:09 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 06:34:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050407133409.50243.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127252 >Sherry: >And while we are on that, I'm always curious why people consider >sirius so terrible, refer to the fact that in OOTP he still hates >Snape, hasn't matured, etc, etc. and yet, Snape hates Harry for >the mere reason that Harry's father was James. I think that's an oversimplification. He doesn't hate Harry because he's James' son. We have only Quirrell's word on it (not that Quirrell had any reason to lie but Q. had other priorities at the time) after all. Snape is quite clear in POA, GOF and OOTP about why he rides Harry. He thinks the other teachers favour him and so he compensates by treating him like any other kid. He overcompensates of course and is constantly looking for proof that Harry is like James which JKR carefully provides by ensuring that it's necessary for Harry to get caught out at night, lying and in general rule-breaking albeit for a good cause. Snape always has a reason for what he does; maybe not a great reason, but a reason nonetheless. Magda __________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 7 13:33:11 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 13:33:11 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127253 --- > > Alla: > > Sure, I can see Snape having some kind of impulsivity. What I don't > see unfortunately is him believing anything Sirius says, especially > if it concerns another person, whose secret Sirius and James are > protecting. I am just not sure that Sirius will be THAT eager to > talk with Snape about Remus. I am also not sure that Severus will > believe any nice things coming from Sirius. Sorry! > Potioncat: I think JKR is slowly giving us the back story. I don't think she's trying to mislead us on this one. (IMHO) So I'm taking the characters as being honest and correct in their versions. So, perhaps Severus thought he was being cunning in tricking Sirius into telling him something about Remus' outings. Sirius was only pretending to "let it slip." (at breakfast with the Slytherins, no doubt.)But I think it's very clear, Sirius intended Severus to know. I'm assuming that since Severus saw Remus with Pomfrey, he isn't expecing danger. He just wants to find out what's going on. If this happened shortly after OWLs, Severus may have felt that he had to do this before the Holiday. In the mean time, James, Sirius, and Peter(?) start toward the tree to join Remus. Sirius tells them they'll find Severus snivelling in fear. James understands the consequences much better than Sirius does and runs ahead, going into the tunnel in human form to save Severus. They all have to face DD. DD understands the danger, but also knows that Severus had no business going in the tunnel. So I'm sure he gave a similar lecture that McG gave Draco for going after Harry/Norbert. I'm not sure if we'll ever know all the details. What I want to know is why they had such loathing for each other. And, as to why Remus doesn't seem too upset about this now, 20 years later, Well, it didn't break up the friendship at the time. Remus and James probably saw this as Sirius being stupid. Not Sirius being a killer. It's easier to overlook a friend's faults than to overlook an enemy's faults. Second option: Severus figured out that Remus was a werewolf and wanted to demonstrate his superior DADA skills. He became reckless and fell for Sirius' trick. He goes into the tunnel expecting to come out a hero for killing/exposing the werewolf. Unfortunately, he wasn't "Merlin's gift to DADA" afterall. He took the tools to kill a vampire instead. Remus never lets an opportunity pass to remind him of that. Hence the vampire essay remark. Potioncat, not taking herself too seriously From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 13:34:33 2005 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 13:34:33 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127254 Marcela wrote: I don't think that Ron really wants to be an Auror because he likes fighting Dark Arts, but mainly because it sounds "cool" to him. ...kids get some skewed notion of a profession and idealize it. In all honesty, I don't really think that Ron is cut out to be an Auror. *Lea replied: I understand what you are saying, and even agree that it is unlikely he will follow that career path. However, I am very curious as to why you feel Ron isn't cut out to be an Auror. Ron has proven himself to be a strategist on several occasions. His mastery of the game of chess at 11/12 years of age is impressive (wasn't it Dumbledore that set up that 'safe guard'?). **Marcela now: I also see your point with the Chess mastery. [BTW, the fourth task in PS was set by McGonagall, Dumbledore's was the Mirror of Erised and seventh.] Yet, there were many opportunities in the books that followed PS in which Ron could have "applied" in a practical way this mastery with strategy and he didn't... To give you the latest examples: in OoTP, it was the Twins that came up with the plan to divert Umbridge's attention so that Harry would be able to break into her office... you might say, well the Twins excell at that and Jo needed to get them out of Hogwarts, I say fine... But then towards the end, when they needed to do the same to break into same office, it was Hermione who designed the plan, she came up with the idea that Ginny and Luna could be of help, she told everybody what to do, the rest followed her orders and willingly. Then again, at the MoM, it was Harry who thought up their escape from the DEs, and somehow, he found Hermione's foot, not Ron's -Jo's choice. What I'm pointing at is that, yes, he is a smart kid, but Jo has not made him the 'strategist' ever again since PS. -----------------o------------------ Lea wrote: Nor did he run when presented with monstrous spiders once in there. ***Marcela: I hate to point this out, but he didn't run because he was in a state of shock: "...Ron looked exactly like Harry felt. His mouth was stretched wide in a kind of silent scream and his eyes were popping. ..." CoS page 276. Disregarding this, I'm not questioning Ron's bravery, we know he is the truest Gryffindor of the three. -----------------o------------------ *Lea wrote: Although we all know that Dumbledore didn't make Harry a Prefect because he thought he would have enough to handle, Ron must have enough 'redeeming' qualities to be the next choice. He isn't the only other boy in Gryffindor in Harry's year. And lastly, Ron, Harry, and Hermione, by the time they finish Hogwarts (if they survive), have faced danger, death eaters, and survived situations that were not in their favor. Wouldn't this count as something? **Marcela now: I wasn't saying that Ron was useless, please. I'm sure that not all Prefects go to Auror training, so Dumbledore choosing Ron over the other Gryffindors for Prefectship doesn't mean he'll be good as an Auror. Addressing your second paragraph: that't my point! I believe that Ron thinks the same as you. He said something along those lines in GoF, when they were thinking about entering the TWT "...You know, I bet we could do them, Harry. We've done dangerous stuff before...". The only problem I see is that Ron didn't perform exactly very well and always got injured -except for CoS, yet his wand got stolen by Lockhart. I really think that Ron has a distorted idea of what being an Auror might involve. We already saw that he didn't like the prefectship responsibilities, yet one of his deepest desires was to be Head Boy... Back to my point: does Ron really want to be an Auror, or is this a maneuver of Jo's to create some drama in HBP, when the kids learn what their OWLs might let them choose from? Jo has made two comments about Ron: 1) She didn't think that Ron had been a doing well as a prefect (infamous 'House points deduction' quote), 2) She said the new Q.Captain might not want Ron in the team. Those comments and Ron's role performance in OoTP gave me the idea that perhaps she'll make Ron's life a bit more difficult in HBP. Taking the War issue out, what else is usually in kids minds at that age (apart from girls :D)? Their future careers. Marcela From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Thu Apr 7 13:41:18 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 21:41:18 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is Draco an only child In-Reply-To: <1112870995.7249.49057.m21@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112870995.7249.49057.m21@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127255 Alexis said: Alexis The Brits practiced a "heir and spare" system, actually - second sons having more of an opportunity to make a name of themselves than any other child, with the obvious exception of the first born - so the Malfoys having only one child is quite odd if one assumes that the WW follows the same Brit system. However, given that magic appears to be able to reduce a great deal of childhood diseases, problems, ect., one can also gather that the need for a spare is also greatly reduced. Therefore, if we follow the logic that the Malfoys entered into an arranged marriage, they would do no more than their duty as far as children are concerned. Upon producing a reasonably sane heir and having little need for a spare, especially considering the period of time when that child would be born, the Malfoys just went on their merry way and forgot about producing another child. You are probably right. Your explanation makes sense.... It's just that it seems to me that the experiences of, say, Crouch senior are a dreadful warning about the danger of having only one child. Something happens to him and you have no one left. Emma From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Apr 7 14:01:44 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:01:44 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127256 Canon: "Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age sixteen," he breathed. "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? you haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?" "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said Dumbledore quietly" - POA, p.391 Pippin: Like everyone else, I've been putting the emphasis on "memory" in Dumbledore'ssentence, and supposing he means,"I remember what happened as well as you do, Severus, so don't try to snow me." But what if the emphasis belongs on "My"? What if Snape honestly can't remember how he got into the tunnel? Suppose he doesn't remember anything between prodding the willow with a stick,to see if Sirius was by some chance telling the truth, and seeing the werewolf at the end of the tunnel? That 'end of the tunnel' bit has always puzzled me. Lupin says that Snape was heading toward the shack, and if he'd got there he'd have met Remus. So how was it that Snape only saw Remus at the Willow end? If Snape had heard Remus coming for him down the tunnel, wouldn't he have run, making James's rescue effort unnecessary? There's some canon that the wizards believe shock can cause amnesia. Lockhart tells the boys that people will believe they lost their memories at the sight of Ginny's mangled body. It's not too dissimilar to some old-fashioned RL beliefs about insanity: no nineteenth century novel was complete without a mad scene, generally brought about by shock. In that case, Dumbledore wouldn't be able to tell whether Snape's memory loss was the aftereffect of some befuddlement spell that had caused him to enter the tunnel, or whether Snape had entered the tunnel of his own volition, and lost his memory at the shock of seeing Remus transformed. Then Dumbledore would simply be reminding Snape that in the absence of evidence proving guilt, Sirius must be regarded as innocent. This has excellent possibilities. It would be much more dramatic to reveal the truth by having Harry solve a mystery than by having someone tell him. He could also suspect that Snape actually did know something that would exonerate Sirius and was using occlumency to hide it from Dumbledore. Personally, I think Snape *was* magicked into entering the tunnel, but I can think of reasons he might have done so of his own volition. Snape might not have needed much excuse;curiosity has taken common sense to the mat more than once in the Potter books, especially where teenage boys are concerned. Harry stuck his nose into Snape's pensieve despite the fact that he knew he was being an idiot to do it. There's also the possibility that Snape thought it was all a bluff: They're trying to make me think there's a werewolf in there so that I'll wet myself and run away screaming and they can have a good laugh at my expense. Sort of like Draco's trick with the fake dementors. Or maybe the Marauders were always teasing Snape for looking like he was part vampire (whether he actually was or not) and the possibility of being able to come back with, "I wouldn't talk, werewolf!" was too tempting to ignore. As to how James found out, Sirius isn't the only source. Snape might also have told someone. I like to think it was Lily, but Snape could have just bragged to his mates that he'd been told how to freeze the willow's branches,and when the word got around James put two and two together. Pippin From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 7 14:17:22 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:17:22 -0000 Subject: Why is Draco an only child In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127257 Emma wrote: > You are probably right. Your explanation makes sense.... It's just > that it seems to me that the experiences of, say, Crouch senior are a > dreadful warning about the danger of having only one child. > Something happens to him and you have no one left. Potioncat: There is a very good reason the Malfoy's only have one child. Everytime a child is about to be concieved, someone bangs loudly on the door. No matter how many security trolls Lucius gets or how terribly he punishes the House elves for letting an intruder in, whenever it's a fertile time of month, there is an interruption to any erm... conceivable activity. The Malfoys don't know who could be doing this, or how she gets in, but they did once catch a glimpse of long blonde hair and found a sprig of bloomsberry on the carpet outside the door. Potioncat (JKR doesn't want the plot complications of another Malfoy child.) From dk59us at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 14:29:32 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:29:32 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20050407012520.041508a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127258 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, > templar1112002 wrote: > > > > > > So, I believe that one of the famous theories is debunked... > > > Ron is Ron, not Dumbledore. Gregory Lynn then wrote: > Which was hardly surprising, but nice enough of her to debunk it, > so that it can rest in peace. > >Actually all it means is that Dumbledore isn't Ron come back from the future. > > > >He could still be a Ron that is artificially aged or who went back > >to the past and grew old from there. Or even a Ron from the past > >resulting from a cloning of the current Ron after he goes to the > >past in the future. Troels Forchhammer followed up: > Not even by a stringent logical analysis of the text can it be > brought to allow any such scenario. > > "NONE of the characters in the books has returned from the future." > > That means that none of the characters is an older version of > another character. Thank god. Eustace_Scrubb notes: While I am as thankful as you about this, Troels, it still means that there are many possibilities not closed off re: time travel. For example, _someone else_ may have travelled to the past and become Dumbledore. Or, at the very least, ONE of the characters may have come from the PAST. One of the characters may be a younger version of another character. And much depends on exactly which "future" she's talking about. The time travel speculators have only been given a minor setback with this comment. Then again, it's a better answer than "Erm, I don't think so." Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From kking0731 at gmail.com Thu Apr 7 14:39:40 2005 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:39:40 -0000 Subject: Dudley and the Dementors In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127259 Finwitch: Simple. Harry (who spends LEAST amount of time with Dursleys in HBP) finds out in the last book. That means, after a year of education. Now, Harry began Occlumency studies (which is a power that is a possibly Voldy-transfer) - BUT: Voldemort is a Legilemens, too. I wouldn't put it past Dumbledore (who can do both) to teach Harry Occlumency (he most definately will do it himself now) AND Legilimency. Harry DOES have this ability, because - much like Parseltongue - he got it from Voldemort. Snow: Very good scenario, Finwitch! Harry may finally recognize that he has abilities that he didn't realize he had and utilize those abilities in such a way that you have described. Harry actually has, unintentionally, saw some of Snape's memories, maybe he will remember that incident and make an attempt to purposely view Petunia or Dudley's memories. Finwitch snipped: You know, all in all - as much as I'd like to see that poor kid get some happiness - defeating Dursleys makes a better story. AND I think that confronting them is actually best for Harry - dealing with his past so he can truly be over it. Snow: Here are a few of JKR's answers to some Dursley questions: O'Malley, Judy. "Talking With . . . J.K. Rowling," Book Links, July 1999 JOM: Harry is very subversive in how he gets back at his terrible relatives. He's a fully developed character, not a victim or saint. Rowling: Yes, he wants to get back at Dudley. He's a human boy, and we the readers want him to get back at Dudley. And, in the long term, trust me, he will. But Harry is also innately honorable. He's not a cruel boy. He's competitive, and he's a fighter. He doesn't just lie down and take abuse. But he does have native integrity, which makes him a hero to me. He's a normal boy but with those qualities most of us really admire. Transcript of Yahooligans! chat with J.K. Rowling, Yahooligans!, October 20, 2000 Yahooligan_Jennifer asks: Did Harry ever use magic on Dudley in the real world? jkrowling_bn: Not so far (hint) The Oregonian, October 22, 2000 "Hints about the future: "There's stuff coming with the Dursleys that people might not expect, but I'm not going to give too much away there if that's OK. . . ." ************* These interviews are all pre-OOP so the last example is somewhat answered already but I was intrigued with the first two answers; Harry getting Dudley back and Harry using magic on Dudley, I don't think there has been any revelation of either of these two quotes. I realize Dudley is not going to have a lot of page time in book six but I think we may find out what he saw when the dementor attacked possibly like you said through the use of legilemency. Can't wait for the twists in the next book even if she rebuffs all of my theories! Snow From bob.oliver at cox.net Thu Apr 7 14:52:44 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:52:44 -0000 Subject: Snape, DD, and MM Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127260 In the ever expanding spiral of posts concerning Snape lately, a lot of people have mentioned his interactions with other faculty, particularly Dumbledore and Minerva, as being more positive than those with the students. I think this is generally true. However, I also think that fanon has greatly exaggerated the positive aspects of Snape's interactions with other faculty. To wit: DUMBLEDORE: He is very respectful toward Dumbledore, and obeys him instantly at the end of GoF despite his obvious anxieties. However, he also has no problem pitching an absolute hissy fit in DD's presence at the end of PoA. This might indicate that Snape sees DD as something of a parental figure, but I think the idea that their is a paternal relationship there is badly overblown in the fandom. For one thing, Dumbledore seemed greatly amused by Snape's discomfort at the end of PoA. That strikes me as in line with having respect for Snape, and having hopes for him, but nevertheless finding him annoying and disappointing enough to take pleasure in a dramatic comeuppance. I think the disappointment in Dumbledore's voice - if it is disappointment - at the end of OOTP also speaks to respect and disappointed hope, but not really to paternal feelings. McG: Certainly they interact with respect, but the "friendliness" between the two of them is, once again, greatly exaggerated in fandom. At the end of OOTP, a scene often cited, Snape is civil and correct, but their is no indication of warmth or pleasure in seeing Minerva. Indeed, his reaction seems more in line with surprise and unexpressed annoyance at being interrupted while berating Harry. Similarly, her interactions with him in this scene, while civil and professional, show no sign of personal warmth or friendship. In fact she proceeds to reward Harry and his friend's in Snape's presence, forcing Snape to acknowledge, against his will, that it is just. It is true that ten points come off from Harry, but that is merely Minerva being professional and acknowledging another teacher's ruling over which she has no control. Indeed, the whole scene reads as yet another subtle jab at Severus (i.e. "oh, and after I've given 200 points you did want your measly 10, didn't you Sevvie old boy?") - in effect twisting the knife she'd already inserted earlier on by forcing Severus to assent to giving points in the first place. So, in sum, Severus' interactions with DD and McG are mostly civil and polite, but I see very little indication of a paternal relationship on one side or a friendship on the other. I think these things are largely fandom creations. Lupinlore From saunya at tampabay.rr.com Thu Apr 7 12:29:17 2005 From: saunya at tampabay.rr.com (saunya) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 08:29:17 -0400 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section References: Message-ID: <002701c53b6d$6af0b0c0$b43ca418@voltron> No: HPFGUIDX 127261 vmonte: > I'm really worried about her comment that there are people who will be upset with the ending but that she really wrote the books for herself and had to be true to herself. > What could make people so upset? The only thing I can come up with is that she is planning on killing Harry. That would be very upsetting indeed. What do you all think? < Tammy replies: > I've been worried for quite awhile that she would kill off Harry. She's been seemingly firm in the idea that 7 books is it - it's her limit. Killing Harry off would most firmly end the Harry Potter series, leaving no room to bring it back. < I think in the sense of 'spiritual evolution' of the character (Harry) there has to be a mutual joining via death or merging in order for her story to be accurate in terms of the 'alchemical' growth she's symbolizing. So I figure harry will either die or become something 'other' with Voldemort. saunya From 5682574 at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 7 11:31:49 2005 From: 5682574 at sbcglobal.net (Pat) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 11:31:49 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: <190.3d463184.2f854fa6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127262 Chancie writes: > does anyone think the current owner of the Riddle house is important? Or have any guesses as to who he/she is? Orcmarauder: > I think I know. Lucius Malfoy. ************************ Rishmosmom: I also thought the owner is Lucius Malfoy, probably because we were told the owner was wealthy, and wasn't doing anything with the property. Who else do we know that is wealthy? From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 15:03:40 2005 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:03:40 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127263 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: > > > > vmonte: > > > > I'm really worried about her comment that there are people who will > > be upset with the ending but that she really wrote the books for > > herself and had to be true to herself. > > > > What could make people so upset? The only thing I can come up with > > is that she is planning on killing Harry. That would be very > > upsetting indeed. What do you all think? > > > Tammy replies: > > I've been worried for quite awhile that she would kill off Harry. > She's been seemingly firm in the idea that 7 books is it - it's her > limit. Killing Harry off would most firmly end the Harry Potter > series, leaving no room to bring it back. I think it's possible that she's going to have Harry die--though unlikely. He is the point- of-view character. How would she end the books, in a view-from-the-other-side long shot, a la American Beauty? More likely she's setting us up for Harry's death and resurrection (symbolic or literal) in book seven. Her vague warning on her website is clearly about book six. And regarding that, I 'd have to say it is extremely unlikely either Harry or his two best friends are going to buy it. If Ron or Hermione die at the end of book six, it will throw the balance of the whole series off. I'll believe one or both of them dying at the end of book seven--it will make me weep, but I'll believe it. But not this time through. No, I'm sticking to my prediction: Dumbledore dies. It's time for Harry to face LV without "the only wizard he ever feared" as back-up. From bethanymil79 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 15:11:28 2005 From: bethanymil79 at yahoo.com (Bethany) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:11:28 -0000 Subject: Snape, DD, and MM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127264 > So, in sum, Severus' interactions with DD and McG are mostly civil > and polite, but I see very little indication of a paternal > relationship on one side or a friendship on the other. I think > these things are largely fandom creations. > > Lupinlore I would tend to agree with you. I don't feel that Snape would have ever gotten so far into the world of the Death Eaters or a member of Slytherin House for that matter if he was a child of DD or McGonagall. I don't think that he shows any notions toward seeing them as parental figures at all. He shows respect to them as Headmaster and Professor, but nothing more than that. I also think that many of Snape's tendencies to follow DD without question, is the fact that DD took him back and allowed him to be a part of Hogwarts even after his shady (to say the least) past. Much of Snape's respect and loyalty to DD probably come from that gratitude - the gratitude for DD allowing Snape to vindicate himself. -Bethany From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Apr 7 15:21:23 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:21:23 -0000 Subject: So, what is to become of Severus Snape? (LONG) In-Reply-To: <20050407125736.79413.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127265 > --- lupinlore wrote: > > > 1) EVER SO EVIL SNAPE > > 2) HERO SNAPE > > 3) ALL ENDS AGAINST THE MIDDLE SNAPE > > 4) DANGEROUSLY TWISTED SNAPE > > 5) REDEMPTIVE BUT BITTER AND UNHEROIC SNAPE> Magda: > What all of these theories have in common is that they give Snape a bigger part of the storyline than JKR probably intends. > So my prediction is that before the halfway point of Book 7, Snape will die - probably very nastily - and that it will be another Learning Experience For Harry. > Pippin: I agree the story centers on Harry. But as I correctly predicted that Harry would never get a chance to live with Sirius, I will use the same theory to predict that Snape will not die any time soon, heroically or otherwise. That would make things much too easy for Harry. IMO, Harry's quest is not to find a replacement father. Harry's quest is to replace his father in another sense, by becoming the man that James was meant to be. To do that, Harry will have to succeed where James failed. He must discover the real traitor, spare his dearest one from having to sacrifice her life, and live to raise a family of his own. And I think to do that, Harry will have to bring himself to trust bitter, sadistic but latent good qualities Snape. That may itself prove redemptive for Snape. But it would still make it too easy for Harry if Snape died, because he wouldn't have to worry that Snape might still betray him. Pippin From ajroald at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 15:35:24 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 15:35:24 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127266 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "templar1112002" wrote: I should never attempt to post after midnight =D. I was really just curious as to 'why' you didn't think he was cut out for the job. Marcela wrote: The only problem I see is that Ron didn't perform exactly very well and always got injured -except for CoS, yet his wand got stolen by Lockhart. Lea: This, by far, is the strongest evidence I've seen as to why he wouldn't make a good auror. However, I do believe there will be a point where Ron will come into his own, if you will. This may or may not lead to being better suited to be an Auror though. Marcela now: I wasn't saying that Ron was useless, please. I'm sure that not all Prefects go to Auror training, so Dumbledore choosing Ron over the other Gryffindors for Prefectship doesn't mean he'll be good as an Auror. Lea: If I implied that you thought Ron was useless, I am very sorry. I was merely trying to point out that, although not the first choice, Ron was selected above the other boys. I have often wondered if this wasn't Dumbledores (JKR's) attempt at helping Ron with some of his confidence and identity issues. No, Ron was NOT a good prefect on many levels. JKR has also pointed out several times that Remus Lupin was *not* a good prefect in his 5th year either. Interesting similarities here for one to ponder. Ron being Harry's best friend, Remus being one of James; Ron having identity/confidence issues, as did Remus; yet it was James who became Head Boy in 7th year (and subsequently died). Marcela: Those comments and Ron's role performance in OoTP gave me the idea that perhaps she'll make Ron's life a bit more difficult in HBP. Taking the War issue out, what else is usually in kids minds at that age (apart from girls :D)? Their future careers. Lea: It seems doubtful that Ron will become an Auror, however, I really never thought Harry would be one either (too much of it while he was in Hogwarts). With the story being from HP's POV though, it's hard to know if Ron has even pondered any other choices, and if so, would he discuss them with Harry. On the flip side of that, since Ron identifies himself so strongly tied with Harry, the thought that they might part ways after Hogwarts probably seems unfathomable to him at this point in time (whether it's his career choice or not). ~ Lea From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 16:27:38 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:27:38 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section-Deaths In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127267 vmonte:" The only thing I can come up with is that she is planning on killing Harry. That would be very upsetting indeed. What do you all think?" Tammy: "How would she end the books, in a view - from - the - other - side long shot, a la American Beauty? More likely she's setting us up for Harry's death and resurrection (symbolic or literal) in book seven. "Her vague warning on her website is clearly about book six. And regarding that, I 'd have to say it is extremely unlikely either Harry or his two best friends are going to buy it." The only outside chance in book six is Ron. I think that Harry has to survive to book seven - I'm guessing he'll survive that, too, and Hermione, as the female lead, I just don't think will die; but for serious impact I think one of the Trio has to go. That leaves Ron. But I generally agree with you, it's an outside chance in six. THE EMOTIONAL IMPACT OF CHARACTER DEATHS FROM 1-10 Harry: 10 Hermione: 10 Ron: 9 Dumbledore: 6 (we're expecting it) Hagrid: 8 Neville: 7 Ginny: 6-7 Luna 5-7 Lupin 5-7 Arthur W. 7-8 Molly W. 8 Fred/George 7 Snape 7 Umbridge: +5 (bonus) Jim Ferer From Snarryfan at aol.com Thu Apr 7 16:40:42 2005 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:40:42 -0000 Subject: Snape, DD, and MM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127268 lupinlore wrote: > McG: Certainly they interact with respect, but the "friendliness" > between the two of them is, once again, greatly exaggerated in > fandom. At the end of OOTP, a scene often cited, Snape is civil >and correct, but their is no indication of warmth or pleasure in >seeing Minerva. Indeed, his reaction seems more in line with >surprise and > unexpressed annoyance at being interrupted while berating Harry. > Similarly, her interactions with him in this scene, while civil and > professional, show no sign of personal warmth or friendship. In > fact she proceeds to reward Harry and his friend's in Snape's > presence, forcing Snape to acknowledge, against his will, that it >is > just. It is true that ten points come off from Harry, but that is > merely Minerva being professional and acknowledging another > teacher's ruling over which she has no control. Indeed, the whole > scene reads as yet another subtle jab at Severus (i.e. "oh, and > after I've given 200 points you did want your measly 10, didn't you > Sevvie old boy?") - in effect twisting the knife she'd already > inserted earlier on by forcing Severus to assent to giving points in > the first place. > I can't speak for the others, but for me, the sign of pleasure in the end of OOTP is when Snape is striding forwards. Maybe Jo didn't want it read like that, or maybe I'm wrong, but I believe it's a positive thing in the body language. He rarely hides what he feels (even if he likes thinking it), and he could just stay where he was, or make a face. But he striding forwards, like if he wanted to go toward her, and it felt positive for me. Christelle From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Apr 7 16:45:40 2005 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 16:45:40 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127269 > vmonte responds: > > I'm really worried about her comment that there are people who will > be upset with the ending but that she really wrote the books for > herself and had to be true to herself. > > What could make people so upset? The only thing I can come up with > is that she is planning on killing Harry. That would be very > upsetting indeed. What do you all think? Jen: Well, if HBP makes it clear that the series is more straight- forward and not detective fiction or a conspiracy plot, a segment of fandom would probably be seriously disappointed. By the end of HBP we should have a pretty clear idea where she's headed. 85% of the series will be out there, and more and more theories will drop like flies with each update from the website. OTOH, if she's not going for a more face-value approach, another segment of fandom could be disappointed. If it's clear ESE!Lupin is true or some conspiracy DD plotted at Godric's Hollow or the like, that could be a sticking point for some readers. Myself included :). Not that I'd ditch the series, but I'll have to do some major mental gymnastics to come to terms with that. But as someone said on this thread, I do think JKR meant that some people will be disappointed by HBP, not the series as a whole. Jen From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 17:09:42 2005 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:09:42 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section-Deaths In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127270 > The only outside chance in book six is Ron. I think that Harry has to > survive to book seven - I'm guessing he'll survive that, too, and > Hermione, as the female lead, I just don't think will die; but for > serious impact I think one of the Trio has to go. That leaves Ron. > But I generally agree with you, it's an outside chance in six. > > THE EMOTIONAL IMPACT OF CHARACTER DEATHS FROM 1-10 > > Harry: 10 > Hermione: 10 > Ron: 9 > Dumbledore: 6 (we're expecting it) > Hagrid: 8 > Neville: 7 > Ginny: 6-7 > Luna 5-7 > Lupin 5-7 > Arthur W. 7-8 > Molly W. 8 > Fred/George 7 > Snape 7 > Umbridge: +5 (bonus) > > Jim Ferer Antosha: I agree with most of your evaluations... there are a few people (Ginny, Lupin) I'd rate a bit higher, one or two (Hagrid, Umbridge :wink:) a bit lower. You left off Percy, who's somewhere around a 4 or 5 in my book. Charlie and Bill also seem like likely victims-- again, rating a 4 or 5, though possibly a bit higher because of the impact on Ron and Ginny's family. McGonagall would probably rate about a 5. Draco's death would devastate a few, but for me that would be about a 2, and only that high because I'm looking forward to seeing him begging for knuts on Diagon Alley at the end of the series. Tonks is probably a 6 for me, though I know some people don't like her as much as I do. I would be surprised if Luna or Tonks gets knocked off in HBP because they were just introduced in OotP. Likewise, Arthur, Ginny and Neville would be unsatisfying (to me) choices, because each of them has already confronted tragedy, and it seems as if having them die at this point would be... cruel. Molly, on the other hand... Well, that would be devastating. The death of _one_ of the twins would be an interesting thing for the survivor and the family to have to deal with. I actually think that Hermione is the MOST likely of the Trio to die. Brilliant as she is, she's the least gifted of the three at tactical spell-casting--she has a tendency to freeze up at critical moments. Also, she is the character with whom the author identifies most strongly. It seems like the sort of thing JKR would do, killing off her alter ego. Also, her dying (most likely mid- to late-book-seven) would a) devastate Ron and Harry and b) change the shipping calculus in a way that one of the boys dying would never do. If Harry or Ron were to die and the living boy were to try to hook up with Hermione, you're going to tell me that the ghost of the dead Trio member wouldn't haunt the couple forever? Whereas, if Hermione dies, both boys--along with her friends and a huge portion of the readership--would mourn her deeply, but it wouldn't affect any relationship the boys were in (or got into). I'm hoping this isn't the case--I'm hoping the DoM Six all survive the series. But my gut tells me that, of the six, Hermione, Luna and Neville are the most likely to cash it in, in that order. Antosha, cackling and rubbing his hands together in ghoulish glee (not) From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 17:14:31 2005 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:14:31 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127271 > > Jen: > But as someone said on this thread, I do think JKR meant that some > people will be disappointed by HBP, not the series as a whole. > > Jen Antosha: Very true! (I agree with the snipped statements you made too, btw.) It's pretty clear that she isn't speaking to book seven yet--she hasn't even started it. But I find it reassuring that the author is comparing HBP to PS/SS and PoA, which I consider to be, if nothing else, the best crafted of the books to date. From bob.oliver at cox.net Thu Apr 7 17:37:51 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:37:51 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127272 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "vmonte" wrote: > > Marcela wrote: > > > I'm really worried about her comment that there are people who will > be upset with the ending but that she really wrote the books for > herself and had to be true to herself. > I don't think we ought to make too much of JKR's comment. She was clearly talking about Book VI and didn't really say anything about the ending, only that some people won't like the book. That is a given. There are so many clashing factions in fandom that any major plot development at this point will set some fairly sizable group off: If it turns out to be H/G the H/Hr people will go up in flames and vice versa. If Snape turns out to be a hero some people will be mad, if he turns out to be a rat others will be mad. If any major character dies somebody will get mad. If there is more pain and sorrow and angst for Harry like OOTP a lot of people will be disgusted, but if things get better for Harry a lot of other people will find it a cop out. If Ron is the Quidditch Captain some people will find it silly, if Harry is then others will find it just as silly. If Harry and/or Dumbledore doesn't step up to provide parental support for Harry a lot of people will be severely disapproving. If one or both does then a lot of people will scream "maudlin!" If Dumbledore turns out to be a manipulator some people will be revolted, if he turns out to love Harry like a grandson some people will yell "incompetent old fool!" Good Slytherins are the answer to some dreams, and the making of some nightmares. If the series turns out to be about Harry making his way to adulthood while losing any parental figure he meets along the route, some people will approve while others will find it manipulative and preachy. If on the other hand Harry finds parental figures that don't die some people will weep that JKR has succumbed to popular desires while others will say that the series is acknowledging Harry's realistic psychological needs. All we know now, thanks to the interview of a Scholastic editor with Al Roker, is that the book is "intense" and "has lots of heart." Which, I suspect, means that the reaction will be -- spectacular. Lupinlore From saunya at tampabay.rr.com Thu Apr 7 15:39:36 2005 From: saunya at tampabay.rr.com (saunya) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:39:36 -0400 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section References: Message-ID: <000901c53b88$01499e00$b43ca418@voltron> No: HPFGUIDX 127273 Antosha wrote: > No, I'm sticking to my prediction: Dumbledore dies. It's time > for Harry to face LV without "the only wizard he ever feared" > as back-up." I hadn't thought of that, but it makes perfect sense - Harry does have to move forward without Dumbledore - and there is the phoenix-death-ressurection theme with DD...the question is, will Dumbledore choose the time for his death and allow it to occur, or will he be taken totally off guard? Hmmm, lotsa thoughts. saunya From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 17:46:34 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 17:46:34 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section-Deaths In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127274 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > I would be surprised if Luna or Tonks gets knocked off in HBP because they were just > introduced in OotP. Likewise, Arthur, Ginny and Neville would be unsatisfying (to me) > choices, because each of them has already confronted tragedy, and it seems as if having > them die at this point would be... cruel. GEO: I'd classify her killing of Sirius in that same category as just plain cruel especially considerings his tragedies and trials were much greater. > I actually think that Hermione is the MOST likely of the Trio to die. Brilliant as she is, she's > the least gifted of the three at tactical spell-casting--she has a tendency to freeze up at > critical moments. Also, she is the character with whom the author identifies most strongly. > It seems like the sort of thing JKR would do, killing off her alter ego. GEO: I very much doubt Rowling has any plans to kill off any member of the trio, but if she did I'd agree that Hermione's death would probably have the greatest impact next to Harry's. As for candidates among the counter trio slated to die, I think Neville and Ginny are the only plausibles ones. Luna was introduced far too late in the series to serve as effective cannon fodder or traitor to the group. From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Thu Apr 7 18:20:20 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 18:20:20 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127275 Hannah writes: I've only just been able to access the newly updated version of JKR's site, so I'm really behind and apologise if this has already been discussed. I was just looking at the debate on who would die based on her comments in the rumours section. But the thing that really struck me when reading the new stuff was what she put about Flitwick. She says: "...Flitwick's genetic composition has been relegated to the very back of my mind over the *six* novels in which he features..." (emphasis mine) Six books? He's been in them all so far, so that suggests to me that he'll be dead by the end of HBP. Maybe that indicates some kind of attack on Hogwarts, in which other teachers (including DD) die. That could be what she's getting at in her rather ominous 'some people won't like this' message. Hannah From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Apr 7 18:36:57 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 14:36:57 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Who owns the Riddle house now? Message-ID: <85.252b3900.2f86d7c9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127276 In a message dated 4/7/2005 8:03:04 AM Pacific Standard Time, 5682574 at sbcglobal.net writes: Chancie writes: > does anyone think the current owner of the Riddle house is important? Or have any guesses as to who he/she is? Orcmarauder: > I think I know. Lucius Malfoy. ************************ Rishmosmom: I also thought the owner is Lucius Malfoy, probably because we were told the owner was wealthy, and wasn't doing anything with the property. Who else do we know that is wealthy? ************************** Chancie yet again: Having read through the posts in reply to this topic, I feel fairly certain it won't be Lucius for several reasons: -Dumbledore states that very few people know Voldemort was Tom Riddle -Bellatrix didn't know that Voldy was Half Muggle, which leads me to think that it wasn't revealed to his inner circle of DE's -Lucius wouldn't employ a Muggle -Lucius would want to own a home in a Muggle town. (He ridicules Author for being in the company of Muggles why would he buy a house in a town full of them?) -IF Lucius bought the house for Voldemort, then why didn't he contact Lucius upon arrival? Wouldn't Voldy want a true DE there to help with his plan? (I do of course know that Voldy thought of Lucius as not being strong enough to look for him and such, but in the graveyard, Voldy still seems to accept him) I believe it COULD be Dumbledore, but these thoughts make me wonder: -IF Dumbledore owned the house, why didn't he know Voldemort had broken in? (Why were there no "alarms" that notified him?) -I believe Dumbledore would have heard of the murder of Frank, wouldn't he have put 2 and 2 together and start investigating LONG before Harry ended up in the Graveyard? Im inclined to think that it could in fact be "Joe Richguy", but that "Joe Richguy" will turn out to be involved in some way. Perhaps the new DADA, or MoM, or something. Any thoughts? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From legacylady at prodigy.net Thu Apr 7 18:19:49 2005 From: legacylady at prodigy.net (LegacyLady) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:19:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050407181949.20740.qmail@web80205.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127277 Legacy: I'm sorry if this inappropriate but I've been following the thread about people being concerned about JKR thinking people will be upset. I agree with those who have voiced they think she is referring to how (or, maybe more accurately WHERE) HBP ends; however, I don't know where/how this thread got started. I've been to the Rumors section of JKR's site and didn't see her comment. Perhaps, if I read it there myself, I would see where others are concerned about/for the series as a whole. Can someone please (privately) point me in the right direction? Thank you! From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 18:48:53 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 11:48:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050407184853.5205.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127278 > Think also of Snape's comment to DD: "Surely you remember that he > tried to kill *ME*?" Again, the possible implication that he > craves validation, craves being considered important. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Or simply craves being alive. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Personals - Better first dates. More second dates. http://personals.yahoo.com From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Apr 7 19:11:01 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 15:11:01 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Flitwick dead? Message-ID: <15a.4e29e1dd.2f86dfc5@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127279 In a message dated 4/7/2005 11:24:39 AM Pacific Standard Time, hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk writes: "...Flitwick's genetic composition has been relegated to the very back of my mind over the *six* novels in which he features..." (emphasis mine) Six books? He's been in them all so far, so that suggests to me that he'll be dead by the end of HBP. Maybe that indicates some kind of attack on Hogwarts, in which other teachers (including DD) die. That could be what she's getting at in her rather ominous 'some people won't like this' message. Hannah ******************************* Chancie: I don't think that JKR statement on Flitwick means he will die... Do you expect her to say "well I didn't really have a place to put his background in the books this far, and I doubt I'll have room in the 7th, so..." That's not her! She's not going to give away who's going to die/or not die! It wouldn't make since for her to say something about book 7 when she hasn't even started on that yet. Not saying that he won't die in HBP, I just don't think her statement can be considered a clue, or at lest not IMO. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From chrissilein at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 20:08:33 2005 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 20:08:33 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? In-Reply-To: <15a.4e29e1dd.2f86dfc5@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: > > In a message dated 4/7/2005 11:24:39 AM Pacific Standard Time, > hannahmarder at y... writes: > > "...Flitwick's genetic composition has been relegated to the very back > of my mind over the *six* novels in which he features..." (emphasis > mine) > > Six books? He's been in them all so far, so that suggests to me that > he'll be dead by the end of HBP. Maybe that indicates some kind of > attack on Hogwarts, in which other teachers (including DD) die. That > could be what she's getting at in her rather ominous 'some people won't > like this' message. > > Hannah > > I think you probably have got a point, Hannah. Why shouldn?t JKR give us such a hint? I expect to see more deaths than "just" one. In book 4 and book 5 several people died. > > ******************************* > > Chancie: > > I don't think that JKR statement on Flitwick means he will die... Do you > expect her to say "well I didn't really have a place to put his background > in the books this far, and I doubt I'll have room in the 7th, so..." That's > not her! She's not going to give away who's going to die/or not die! > It wouldn't make since for her to say something about book 7 when she > hasn't even started on that yet. Not saying that he won't die in HBP, > I just don't think her statement can be considered a clue, or at lest not > IMO. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Apr 7 20:36:06 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 20:36:06 -0000 Subject: Bending the rules in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127281 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Emma Hawkes wrote: Meri: > Was his borrowing the car from work without permission? I assume > you're talking about PoA where he and the other Weasleys escorted > Harry to King's Cross? I'm pretty sure he called in a favor for those > to keep Harry safe from Sirius. Geoff: That's what he said, but there's an interesting bit of canon to go with this.... '"How're we getting to King's Cross tomorrow, Dad?" asked Fred, as they tucked into a sumptuous chocolate pudding. "The Ministry's providing a couple of cars," said Mr.Weasley. Everyone looked up at him. "Why?" said Pery curiously. "It's because of you, Perce," said George seriously. "And there'll be little flags on the bonnnets with HB on them - " "- for Humungous Bighead," said Fred. Everyone except Percy and Mrs.Weasley snorted into their pudding. "Why are the Ministry providing cars, Father?" Percy asked again, in a dignified voice. "Well, as we haven't got one any more," said Mr.Weasley, "and as I work there, they're doing me a favour..." His voice was casual but Harry couldn't help noticing that Mr.Weasley's ears had gone red, just like Ron's did when he was under pressure.' (POA "The Leaky Cauldron" p.52 UK edition) Harry has a "hmmm" reaction. He suspects that Arthur is not being exactly truthful. And later, after he overhears the conversation between Ron's parents, his "hmmm" reaction is taking firmer shape in his mind. 'So Sirius Black was after him. That explained everything. Fudge had been lenient with him because he was so relieved to find him alive. He'd made Harry promise to stay in Diagon Alley where there were plenty of wizards to keep an eye on him. And hew as sending two Ministry cars to take them all to the station tomorrow so that the Weasleys could look after Harry unitl he was on the train.' (ibid. p.55) This doesn't look like Arthur pulling in favours. That is a front for the family; I think Harry has got nearer to the truth of the matter than he is supposed to. From Zarleycat at aol.com Thu Apr 7 21:04:02 2005 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:04:02 -0000 Subject: So, what is to become of Severus Snape? (LONG) In-Reply-To: <20050407125736.79413.qmail@web53104.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127282 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > --- lupinlore wrote: > > > 1) EVER SO EVIL SNAPE > > 2) HERO SNAPE > > 3) ALL ENDS AGAINST THE MIDDLE SNAPE > > 4) DANGEROUSLY TWISTED SNAPE > > 5) REDEMPTIVE BUT BITTER AND UNHEROIC SNAPE > > What all of these theories have in common is that they give Snape a > bigger part of the storyline than JKR probably intends. As much as I > personally find it incomprehensible, she finds the Trio and pals more > interesting than the adults, and all the adults including Snape are > important only in that they touch on the Trio's lives and > development, especially Harry's. Marianne: Wholehearted agreement. The adults are way more interesting, if for no other reason than that most of them have serious issues. And, yes, I doubt Snape is going to become the dominant player in the last two books, even if he is the HBP. Magda: > So my prediction is that before the halfway point of Book 7, Snape > will die - probably very nastily - and that it will be another > Learning Experience For Harry. Details yet to be determined but > sometime in Book 6 there will be some kind of incident which Harry > will misinterpret and which will not be resolved until after Snape's > death when Harry will admit that the git wasn't a completely lousy > person (an acknowledgement made easier because Snape isn't around > anymore to hear it). Marianne: Oh, no. I think it will be much more interesting to have Snape suffer horribly, but live. The light will dawn, the dime will drop and Harry eyes will be opened to Snape's latent good qualities and he will not only admit them to himself, he will show true Gryffindor courage and admit them to Snape's face. He will also apologize sincerely for his past behavior and thank Snape for the things Snape has done for him. This will immediately be followed by Snape's head exploding in a most spectacular fashion. But, alas, the Potions Master's last second of life will be extremely unhappy because he will finally realize that Harry is not James. Marianne From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 21:19:18 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:19:18 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: <20050407184853.5205.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127283 >>SSSusan: >Think also of Snape's comment to DD: "Surely you remember that he tried to kill *ME*?" Again, the possible implication that he craves validation, craves being considered important.< >>Magda: >Or simply craves being alive.< Betsy: Hee! Thank you! I've been long confused as to why folks think Snape is making a mountain out of a mole-hill regarding the Prank. He. Nearly. DIED. That's huge. If someone pulled a joke on me, and I barely escaped with my life, I think I'd remember it. And if those same someones not only didn't get punished for the joke, but were remembered quite fondly by the staff of the institution in which the joke was pulled, I'd probably feel just a tad resentful. (Of course, if I'd been held upside down, undies on display for the world, while snide remarks were made about my personal hygiene, and if said undies were later removed... Yeah, I'd get *real* ugly.) Snape isn't all that complicated. The man is pissed. Do you really blame him? And yes, this all happened years ago, but the particular players in those terrible memories were surrounding him in the Shack. Anyone would lose it. Think of it as a particularly trying Thanksgiving dinner - or some such family gathering. Betsy From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Thu Apr 7 21:35:28 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:35:28 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? In-Reply-To: <15a.4e29e1dd.2f86dfc5@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127284 Hannah originally:> > "...Flitwick's genetic composition has been relegated to the very back > of my mind over the *six* novels in which he features..." (emphasis > mine) > > Six books? He's been in them all so far, so that suggests to me that > he'll be dead by the end of HBP. Maybe that indicates some kind of > attack on Hogwarts, in which other teachers (including DD) die. That > could be what she's getting at in her rather ominous 'some people won't > like this' message. > Chancie replied: > > I don't think that JKR statement on Flitwick means he will die... Do you > expect her to say "well I didn't really have a place to put his background > in the books this far, and I doubt I'll have room in the 7th, so..." That's > not her! She's not going to give away who's going to die/or not die! > It wouldn't make since for her to say something about book 7 when she > hasn't even started on that yet. Not saying that he won't die in HBP, > I just don't think her statement can be considered a clue, or at lest not > IMO. Hannah: It may not be a clue, of course, but it's just the way she's phrased it, specifically the line 'that he's featured in.' Why not say 'the six books so far' or 'the six books I've written?' Or simply 'the six books' or just 'the books.' Adding, 'that he's featured in' alters the meaning, IMO, to suggest that he *isn't* featured in the seventh. Maybe it's an accidental thing, maybe it's a deliberate clue. But it just seems strange. I don't expect her to go into the kind of detail you are suggesting, of course not. Were it not for those four extra words, I doubt I'd even have noticed anything. But why add 'that he's featured in?' It seems almost unnecessary. JMO Hannah From elanorpam at yahoo.com.br Thu Apr 7 22:36:18 2005 From: elanorpam at yahoo.com.br (Paula "Elanor Pam") Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 19:36:18 -0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's career choice References: Message-ID: <009801c53bc2$3a0864d0$0601010a@harrypotter> No: HPFGUIDX 127285 From: "mfterman" > Ron is destined for a career in the Ministry, the same as his > dad. Whatever else he thinks, he's going to end up going there. > It is his destiny. He's not cut out to be an Auror. He's really > more suited for entering the Wizarding bureacracy and working > his way up through the ranks, especially with Hermione driving > his career along. > > "mfterman" What's this with people and destiny? Good lord, the whole point of the books is that we can and should choose what to do with what we receive in our life!! I firmly believe that the purpose of Ron in the story is to show how an "average" person can do incredible things despite or even thanks to his disadvantages. Ron can be anything he wants. Ministry worker, professional chess player, dragon tamer, writer, artist, quidditch player, auror, whatever. And I'm sure that's what he's going to learn in the next books - that his future is his own to make. Elanor Pam, who hates and despises the concept of a clear-cut destiny with an undying passion From t.forch at email.dk Thu Apr 7 23:31:48 2005 From: t.forch at email.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 01:31:48 +0200 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20050407012520.041508a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20050408012520.0418a570@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 127286 At 14:29 07-04-05 +0000, Eustace_Scrubb wrote: >While I am as thankful as you about this, Troels, it still means that >there are many possibilities not closed off re: time travel. Of course there are -- and many interesting possibilities. >For example, _someone else_ may have travelled to the past and become >Dumbledore. No. None of the characters have returned from the future. Dumbledore is not someone else who has travelled back in time to become Dumbledore. He may have travelled in time in the same manner as Harry and Hermione, but not in order to change identity, nor has he visited the future of the plot at any point (including, IMO, the point when he delivers Harry to the Dursleys). >Or, at the very least, ONE of the characters may have come >from the PAST. They all come from the past. That is part of the normal human condition ;-) >One of the characters may be a younger version of another character. Nope. >And much depends on exactly which "future" she's talking about. Again I disagree. >The time travel speculators have only been given a minor setback with >this comment. One would have thought that people believing that the universe was created a few thousand years ago had been given severe set- backs by the discoveries of rocks that are millions of years old, but they do manage to convince themselves otherwise . . . >Then again, it's a better answer than "Erm, I don't think so." Much better, though, IMHO, it ought to have been unnecessary. Regards, Troels Forchhammer From sharon8880 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 18:48:24 2005 From: sharon8880 at yahoo.com (sharon) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 18:48:24 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127287 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: SNIP > No, I'm sticking to my prediction: Dumbledore dies. It's time for Harry to face LV without > "the only wizard he ever feared" as back-up. Now let's put the brakes on that thought for a minute please. Harry did face Voldemort without Dumbledore in PS/SS, COS, & GOF, mostly successfully. I can partially agree with your thought. I don't think Harry needs to face LV without DD. Harry needs to face life & the world itself without DD. In reply to the many other posts regarding a major character death, I don't think DD's death would be the primary event that would spur Harry on to defeat LV. I think it would have to be the death of someone intimately close to Harry to motivate him to move. Yes, Harry is close to DD, but not in the same way as he is close to Ron, Hermione, & Hagrid. These are the 3 people in his life to which he is closest. I think the death of one of these 3 would be the motivating factor for Harry to actually to action. He would be so hurt & so angry & so emotionally moved that he would have no choice to do anything else. I think it will take something this extreme to get him to move. We've seen that Harry moves more so with his emotions rather than his head. Reason, for some reason, doesn't movtivate him. He knew full well the importance of continuing & the consequences of not continuing his occumenlcy lessons, yet he let his anger towards Snape stop him from finishing. This is just one example among several. I'm not sure how much of this has been discussed. I didn't do a search and am only relying on my memory from lurkdom that it hasn't been much. Harry has a deeper, closer relationship with Hagrid than with DD. Yes, he has a close relationship with DD, but it's more of a parental one. Harry has a more friendship type of relationship with Hagrid. He is more willing to confide in Hagrid with no fear of repercussion as with DD. I think Hagrid's death would deeply deeply impact Harry much more than DDs. Sharon From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 02:29:43 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 02:29:43 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127288 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > Maybe it's an accidental thing, maybe it's a deliberate clue. But > it just seems strange. I don't expect her to go into the kind of > detail you are suggesting, of course not. Were it not for those > four extra words, I doubt I'd even have noticed anything. But why > add 'that he's featured in?' It seems almost unnecessary. Tonks: Well she is probably up to her usual tricks which we all love so well! It could be he dies in book 6, or it could mean that there are more important things going on in book 7 and there is no room to include him, or it could mean that Hogwarts is not going to be in book 7, or any number of things. Let's see now he is the charms instructor, right? And we think that charms had something to do with what happened at GH. Oh heck, what else is there to do for the next 100 days. I will start a rumor. He is killed somehow or dies and it is his pensive that DD and Harry are looking in. Flitwick was involved in the charm that saved Harry. Maybe he taught it to Lily, maybe he is the one that cast it. Maybe LV is looking for Flitwick for information about how to counter the charm. Can't think that LV is not able to figure it out on his own, but he does seem to miss a few things here and there. Humm.. what else... the rat gets to him.. Maybe something to do with the fact that he is part goblin. Goblins are good at protecting things. and on and on.... ;-) Tonks_op Tonks_op From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 02:43:11 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 02:43:11 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127289 Alla wrote: > > Again, sorry for repeating myself , but surely Sirius and Snape did not like each other way before Prank happened, right? JKR did say that they loathed each other, so why stop and have a chat with each other? Why, why, why? Carol responds: As I understand it, there was no chat involved. It was more like Sirius daring Severus, saying in a sneering undertone something like, "If you're so damned curious about what's going on here, *Snivellus*, just prod the Whomping Willow with a stick after moonrise tonight." That might have given Severus the idea that Sirius was trying to scare him into thinking Remus was a werewolf, but it would also have aroused his curiosity. And, not wanting to be considered a coward, he would not have turned down the opportunity in any case. No friendly chat involved, just two boys who hate each other coming to an agreement--rather like agreeing to have a wizard's duel but with potentially deadly consequences. (BTW, I'm pretty sure that the so-called Prank occurred in sixth year, probably early in the first term, and not immediately after the OWLs incident. Snape referring to Sirius as being sixteen seems to me like shorthand for sixth year.) For me the only question (aside from how much James and Peter knew) is how James could have saved Severus's life without betraying his own secret and turning into a stag. He seems to have remained in human form. Could he have used a stunning spell and wafted him along the tunnel in a precursor of the PoA scene? And did he just slam a door on werewolf!Remus to keep him out of the tunnel? It's the *how* of the scene (the mechanics) rather than the why (the motives) that has *me* confused. Carol From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 02:48:22 2005 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 02:48:22 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127290 Sharon: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" > wrote: > SNIP > > No, I'm sticking to my prediction: Dumbledore dies. It's time for > Harry to face LV without > > "the only wizard he ever feared" as back-up. > > Now let's put the brakes on that thought for a minute please. Harry > did face Voldemort without Dumbledore in PS/SS, COS, & GOF, mostly > successfully. Antosha: In PS/CS, it is DD who pulls Quirrell off of Harry just as he is about to give in. In CoS, it is Fawkes, appearing explicitly because of Harry's faith in DD, who saves Harry's bacon. In GoF, Harry escapes Voldemort all on his lonesome, it's true... only to stumble into the arms of LV's most faithful servant. Again, Harry is about to die when Dumbledore (and McGonagall and Snape) come in and save him. I think JKR has done a wonderful job of having Harry be both a hero and a child--and DD has been the safety net that has allowed that to happen. Now, as you point out later in your post, Harry needs to become an adult; as much as I will be sad to see him go, I think the most dramatically effective way for Harry to achieve his destiny is without Dumbledore there to catch him. >I can partially agree with your thought. I don't > think Harry needs to face LV without DD. Harry needs to face life > & the world itself without DD. > In reply to the many other posts regarding a major character death, > I don't think DD's death would be the primary event that would spur > Harry on to defeat LV. I think it would have to be the death of > someone intimately close to Harry to motivate him to move. Yes, > Harry is close to DD, but not in the same way as he is close to Ron, > Hermione, & Hagrid. These are the 3 people in his life to which he is > closest. I think the death of one of these 3 would be > the motivating factor for Harry to actually to action. He would be > so hurt & so angry & so emotionally moved that he would have no > choice to do anything else. I think it will take something this > extreme to get him to move. Harry has a deeper, closer relationship with Hagrid than > with DD. Yes, he has a close relationship with DD, but it's more of > a parental one. Harry has a more friendship type of relationship > with Hagrid. He is more willing to confide in Hagrid with no fear > of repercussion as with DD. I think Hagrid's death would deeply > deeply impact Harry much more than DDs. > Sharon This is true--has always been true. Harry has always felt a stronger connection to Hagrid than to anyone in the magical world other than Ron and Hermione, at least until OotP, at which point some of his other peers have begun to become trusted confidants--the twins, Ginny, Luna--and Hagrid has faded into the background a bit, Grawp notwithstanding. I'm going to revert to form here and trot out Joseph Campbell, because his theories seem apropos. In the Hero with a Thousand Faces, his seminal work on the archetypal cycle of the Hero Journey, Campbell points out a number of crucial figures who must be met along the way. The first is the Threshold Guardian, the terrifying creature who both welcomes and terrifies, who is the first test of the hero as s/he crosses out of the realm of the mundane and into the underworld of adventure. That's Hagrid. Dumbledore, on the other hand, is the Mentor, the wise helper who points out dangers and obstacles along the way, who protects the hero in the early stages of the journey. Inevitably, however, this figure must be left behind or transcended, in order for the hero's journey to be truly his or her own. So, once again, I see DD dying sooner rather than later. Too, there's the question of why you put an ancient wizard in a series of stories starring a young hero. What else is he going to do but pass away? Fine, you can have him around to swoop in after the heroic act is complete, as Gandalf saves Frodo after the Ring has been destroyed. But even Gandalf died, if only to be reborn. Same with Obi Wan. Or Merlin. Same with thousands of other wise men and women in thousands of myths, folktales and novels. None of them are there at the last crisis. Mind, I'm not sure that both Hagrid and DD don't die. I'd just be surprised if they both cash it in at the end of HBP--that's where I expect Dumbledore to take his final bow. Then again, I could be wrong. :-) Antosha From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 03:00:43 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 03:00:43 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127291 Carol responds: As I understand it, there was no chat involved. It was more like Sirius daring Severus, saying in a sneering undertone something like, "If you're so damned curious about what's going on here, *Snivellus*, just prod the Whomping Willow with a stick after moonrise tonight." That might have given Severus the idea that Sirius was trying to scare him into thinking Remus was a werewolf, but it would also have aroused his curiosity. And, not wanting to be considered a coward, he would not have turned down the opportunity in any case. Alla: In this speculation how did Sirius made Snape listen? Had he approached him in the Great Hall to make sure that he won't walk away? I see staged conversation as more likely possibility, IMO. You know what I am saying? I just don't see those two willingly coming into contact with each other, unless they want to hex each other or harm each other otherwise. And IF that happened as you describe, I would call Snape in that scenario very very stupid. In your speculation Sirius clearly invites him to the danger and I just don't see Snape going into danger even for a fear of being calling a coward. He is not a Gryffindor, after all ( which is too bad ;o)) I am not calling him a coward, on the contrary. I just don't see him CARING MUCH if someone else will think of him as coward, if the alternative is putting himself into the danger . JMO of course, Alla. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 03:01:39 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 03:01:39 -0000 Subject: Harry's Motivation (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127292 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sharon" wrote: I think the death of one of these 3 would be > the motivating factor for Harry to actually to action. He would be > so hurt & so angry & so emotionally moved that he would have no > choice to do anything else. I think it will take something this > extreme to get him to move. Tonks: I don't think that Harry is going to be motived by anger. I think he is going to do what he is going to do for other reasons. Harry is going to find out what happened that night at GH. He is going to find out about the ancient magic that saved him and how it happened. He is going to understand his position in the WW and MW and what he must do. He will not initially want to do it. He will struggle with the idea, but he will eventually embrace it as his duty and his free choice. It will be the Love within him that moves him on. Harry will come to the point in his life where he understands *who* he is and why he is here. He will know the meaning of his life. He will mature far beyond his years. He, with DD's help, will plan the next move. Many people are going to die. Probably Snape, Hagrid, maybe McG. Muggles may die as well. I think we will see the war at its height. There will be brother against brother, parent against child, it will be horrible. Some of the children will die, but I don't think that any of the trio will die, yet. Not yet. Later, in book 7, but not in book 6. And DD will never die. Ron will betray Harry at some point in book 6 or 7. Harry will die in book 7. It will rip our hearts out. We will hate JKR before the end. But there will be a hero's ending and we will remember the lessons all the rest of our lives. Tonks_op From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 03:05:43 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 03:05:43 -0000 Subject: Harry's Motivation (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127293 Tonks: Ron will betray Harry at some point in book 6 or 7. Harry will die in book 7. It will rip our hearts out. We will hate JKR before the end. But there will be a hero's ending and we will remember the lessons all the rest of our lives. Alla: I'd like to know what is the basis for the speculation that Ron will betray Harry? Also I'd like to repeat my bet for Harry's fate - he will endure symbolic death in book 7 and will be somehow resurrected. Of course I WANT this to happen, but I do think that it is likely to happen. Any takers? JMO of course, Alla. From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Apr 8 04:06:12 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 04:06:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's Motivation (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127294 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > And DD will never die. Well, I think DD is only too mortal, and hence doomed to die just like everyone else. Standard patterns would dictate the end of Book VI, although they may not hold. Ron will betray Harry at some > point in book 6 or 7. Judas!Ron crops up in speculation from time to time. I suppose it's possible, but I really don't see the evidence. It's true that Ron does have a jealous fit for a month or so in GoF, but comes around immediately when he realizes Harry is in danger. I don't think we have any evidence at all he would betrau his best friend. Harry will die in book 7. It will rip our > hearts out. We will hate JKR before the end. But there will be a > hero's ending and we will remember the lessons all the rest of our > lives. > Well, everyone would react to that very differently, :-). Some would find it morally inspiring and uplifting. Others would find it depressing beyond belief and the ruination of the series. Myself, if I paid good money (and spent an enormous amount of time) on a series only to have it end like that, the only lesson I'll remember is to read JKR's books in the library from now on (as I will with Stephen King after the Dark Tower, talk about a silly ending!) I suppose the books would make good door chocks, though. Actually, I think this ending is very unlikely, although certainly possible. However, I agree with Alla that we might see a symbolic death/resurrection. There is certainly enough phoenix/Christ imagery in the books for that to happen. I don't think we will see a literal resurrection, though. It would be too heavy-handed for one thing, as well as violating JKR's oft-stated prohibition on people coming back from the dead. Lupinlore From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Fri Apr 8 04:15:41 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 04:15:41 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127295 > Alla: > > > In this speculation how did Sirius made Snape listen? Had he > approached him in the Great Hall to make sure that he won't walk > away? I see staged conversation as more likely possibility, IMO. > > You know what I am saying? I just don't see those two willingly > coming into contact with each other, unless they want to hex each > other or harm each other otherwise. And IF that happened as you > describe, I would call Snape in that scenario very very stupid. In > your speculation Sirius clearly invites him to the danger and I just > don't see Snape going into danger even for a fear of being calling a > coward. He is not a Gryffindor, after all ( which is too bad ;o)) I > am not calling him a coward, on the contrary. I just don't see him > CARING MUCH if someone else will think of him as coward, if the > alternative is putting himself into the danger . > > JMO of course, > Alla. Valky: How about Sirius taunts Snape with something like "I've been down there, I know where it goes and why." or something to that effect causing Snape to act on his jealous instincts to know and be in on *at least* as much conspiracy as his enemy. Works for me, and still in the context of the scenario I wrote earlier. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 8 04:31:40 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 04:31:40 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127296 SSSusan previously: >>>Think also of Snape's comment to DD: "Surely you remember that he tried to kill *ME*?" Again, the possible implication that he craves validation, craves being considered important.<<< Magda: > >Or simply craves being alive.<< Betsy: > Hee! Thank you! I've been long confused as to why folks think > Snape is making a mountain out of a mole-hill regarding the > Prank. He. Nearly. DIED. That's huge. SSSusan: FWIW, since you included a snip of my post before responding with this comment, I would like to remark that the issue of whether Snape should or shouldn't be angry about the prank wasn't a part of anything I was arguing. (Yup, I'd have been angry, too.) I was pointing out that I believe Snape is a good fit for the *clinical* definition of a narcissistic personality, as opposed to the more colloquial use of the term. I believe Snape's emphasis on "me" in that sentence could be indicative of his desire to have DD validate his (Snape's) importance. It *could* be just a straightforward accusation that Sirius attempted murder, but the emphasis on "me" makes it intriguing... and one *possible* explanation for the emphasis could be that it is instructive of how Snape thinks about things, himself in particular. Betsy: > Snape isn't all that complicated. The man is pissed. SSSusan: This is definitely one possibility. OTOH, what Mara & I have each presented on the possibility of narcissistic!Snape also fits nicely. In fact, while narcissistic!Snape may seem to be saying he's more complex than pissed, I like it precisely because in some ways it IS very simple -- it explains so *much* all in one package. His getting along w/ DD (who is empathetic and validates him), his unwillingness to change even though Harry is important and NEEDS to learn, his outrage over the lost Order of Merlin, his hateful treatment of Harry from the *start,* his nastiness to Hermione, and on and on. In some ways, this label makes things *simpler* -- it certainly makes Snape more understandable in my eyes, anyway. Siriusly Snapey Susan From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Fri Apr 8 05:59:06 2005 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2005 22:59:06 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Flitwick dead? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1941103778.20050407225906@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127298 Thursday, April 7, 2005, 7:29:43 PM, Tonks wrote: T> Maybe something to do with the fact that he is part T> goblin. Um... He *is*?? Is this Canon? And if so, why didn't Umbridge persecute *him*? -- Dave From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 8 06:22:23 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 06:22:23 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? In-Reply-To: <1941103778.20050407225906@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127299 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Dave Hardenbrook wrote: > > Thursday, April 7, 2005, 7:29:43 PM, Tonks wrote: > > T> Maybe something to do with the fact that he is part > T> goblin. > > Um... He *is*?? Is this Canon? And if so, why didn't Umbridge > persecute *him*? > > -- > Dave Hi Dave, JKR just updated her Rumours and FAQs section. Included in the scraps she threw us doggies here begging at the table was a bit of Flitwick's back story. "Flitwick has a background that I now realise will never see its way into the books because it is not relevant to the plot. He is human but with a dash of goblin ancestry--something like a great, great, great grandfather. This is only interesting in as much as it gives him a perhaps unexpected empathy for people like Hagrid who are, in Death Eater parlance, half-breeds." So yes, we can now accept this tidbit as canon. imamommy From aggiescatz at aol.com Thu Apr 7 18:51:55 2005 From: aggiescatz at aol.com (kittykataddict) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 18:51:55 -0000 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? In-Reply-To: <85.252b3900.2f86d7c9@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127300 Dumbledore DID know about the gardener's death (he read the Muggle newspapers) and presumably had been investigating matters way before Harry touched the portkey - he tried to convince Fudge that the disappearances of Crouch Sr and Bertha Jorkins were linked and mentioned Frank's disappearance to Harry on the day Harry dreamed of V torturing Wormtail. "kittykataddict" From WNCMegs at aol.com Thu Apr 7 21:01:14 2005 From: WNCMegs at aol.com (Megan) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:01:14 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127301 Potioncat: > Unfortunately, he wasn't "Merlin's gift to DADA" afterall. He > took the tools to kill a vampire instead. Remus never lets an > opportunity pass to remind him of that. Hence the vampire essay > remark. Megan: Where is this quote made? I cannot remember there being a quote about this. I am sure you are right, but can you tell me where so I can look it up? I am curious to see the events surrounding this remark. THANKS! From ajroald at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 21:26:41 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:26:41 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127302 Hannah writes: > But the thing that really struck me when reading > the new stuff was what she put about Flitwick. She says: > > "...Flitwick's genetic composition has been relegated to > the very back of my mind over the *six* novels in which he > features..." (emphasis mine) > > Six books? He's been in them all so far, so that suggests > to me that he'll be dead by the end of HBP. Maybe that > indicates some kind of attack on Hogwarts, in which other > teachers (including DD) die. That could be what she's > getting at in her rather ominous 'some people won't like > this' message. JKR's statement about Flitwick being in only six books is probably because that is all that has been written. However, I will not deny that she is crafty and clever, and it could have possibly been her *hint* to those astute enough to catch it (and therefore, kudo's to you!). Flitwick dying just doesn't seem right though. Perhaps I'm wrong, but he just doesn't seem to be an *important* enough character to make any impact on the readers/fans if he dies. He may be the secondary character that dies, but if that is the case, someone else dies too. One who will make us want to write JKR nasty letters and threaten not to read any more of her books if she doesn't bring that character back. (Just kidding!) Guess we'll all find out in July. ~ Lea From mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 7 21:58:15 2005 From: mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net (mallrat42g) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 21:58:15 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127303 I think the only career choice Ron is going to have is a harp player because I, along with some of my friends who read the books, think that Ron is going to perish. I know everyone is going to attck me here, but, there are a lot of people who think that. Hey, if I'm wrong, then I'm worng. However, I won't stand down until I read it for myself. "mallrat42g" From ajroald at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 06:25:09 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 06:25:09 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? In-Reply-To: <1941103778.20050407225906@mindspring.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127304 > Tonks wrote: > > Maybe something to do with the fact that he is part > > goblin. Dave > Um... He *is*?? Is this Canon? And if so, why didn't Umbridge > persecute *him*? Yes, apparently he is. This was posted on JKR's website in the FAQ - About the Books section. Quote from website: "He is human but with a dash of goblin ancestry - something like a great, great grandfather." Why Umbridge didn't persecute him is a good question. She must not have known. ~ Lea From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Fri Apr 8 08:33:19 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 08:33:19 -0000 Subject: Much obsessed by death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127305 I wonder if the huge, climactic death of a megaprominent character is the only way to get to a satisfying series ending. Right now, the list seems to be measuring one character after another for shrouds! I find myself suspecting that more deaths will come - this is, or will be, war after all - but that the engine that will drive the conclusion eventually will be something else. And I find myself thinking sadly about the possibility of Harry, at least, doing a Prospero and renouncing magic in favour of life in a suburban Muggle semi. There would have to be sufficient justification, and I imagine that one good reason might be the death or deaths of someone/lots of someones close to him ... or he might come home to Privet Drive one summer day to find that Uncle Vernon has found a new trophy wife, Dudley is following the main chance, and it is his duty to be the prop and stay of his unfortunate aunt! In which case, Duty Would Call. There's also the possibility of the same sort of thing on a wider screen - let LV be defeated, and then let the WW voluntarily disband in order to prevent any such disaster from arising again. The message being: reject supernatural aids, and work at being the best version of a human that you can achieve. These are children's books, after all. In which case Arthur Weasley would be much in demand as a coach for prospective new Muggles - coached himself behind the scenes by Hermione, of course! You read it here first ... Deborah From valy1x2 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 8 08:45:41 2005 From: valy1x2 at hotmail.com (Valy) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:45:41 +0200 Subject: Who owns the Riddle house now? References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127306 And why wouldn't this person be... Voldemort himself? After all, this is his father's house, and despite it's in a muggle area, this is a good hide, since Voldemort is known for hating muggles, and hiding in a muggle area (but without having to chat with them, and making himself discreet not to attract curious people, and making grow the number of killed on his list, and then attract the OotP, who've heard in some ways some strange muggles are missing, etc...) would be a good idea. Why not after all? Valy. From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 09:10:25 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 09:10:25 -0000 Subject: Ron's career choice - and other's too In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127307 Steve wrote: > I think there is a chance that they could both become > Aurors with somewhat limited academics overcome by > demonstrated ability and experience. > > All that said, I would add that given the stress and trauma, > as well as physical and emotional wounds they will both > (Harry/Ron) experience before the Dark Lord is defeated, > they may very well have had their fill of danger and > adventure, and long for a quiet safe life. > > If they follow that route, I suspect they could both get > jobs with Fred and George. (something I've commented on > previously and extensively.) mz_annethrope now: I really can't imagine Ron ever working for Fred and George. He's always played second fiddle (well, more like viola) to his older brothers and seems both desparate and scared to get out from under their shadows. He'd be great at marketing their products, but he'd be miserable working for his them as they would lord it over him. I think Ginny too would be glad to get away from them. A problem with Ron is that some reasonable career choices don't seem to exist in the WW. I could imagine him as an actor: he has plenty of drive (look at how hard he practised Quidditch) and he likes to be the center of attention, but I don't think Molly would be too happy with him if he did a stand up act for the Weird Sisters. It wouldn't make him any money either. As for Harry, I think once a danger addict always a danger addict. (mz-annethrope knows all about that.) Meanwhile mz_annethrope has looked into her crystal ball and predicts the future careers of favorite or not so favorite characters, if they happen to survive: Molly: get that woman a job. The twins persuade her to cater for some of their fireworks parties. She decides she likes this and becomes a professional caterer. She writes a book and has a weekly show on the wizarding wireless. (Unless Arthur invents a wizarding television. He'll make lots of money from it, but only because the twins market it.) Percy: mz_annethrope gazes into her ball and predict his immediate future will be to write those upcoming Ministry pamphlets about he- who-must-not-be-named's return. Ron: Wizarding sports broadcaster and talk show host. Invents Wizarding D&D in his spare time. Starts a Quidditch theme pub in Diagon Alley that proudly features his Dad's new wizarding television invention. Ginny: Briefly a Gringott's curse breaker,then a spy. Hermione: Unsuccessful as a campaigner for elfish welfare. Gets bored with her job as an unspeakable and heads Dept. of International Magical Cooperation. Ends up as Minister of Magic. More successful here but at risk for a Malfoy assassination. Or teaches at Hogwarts. Draco: Scenario 1) His parent's property is attainted. With what little is left he sets up a security firm that grows into a bigtime protection racket. His firm is responsible for training Azkaban guards. Scenario 2) Inherits his parent's property. Add Scenario 1 to his list of holdings. Crabbe and Goyle: first work as Draco's bodyguards, then run Draco's Azkaban security firm. Neville: He finds out what stink sap is good for. He owns a farm that grows magical plants. He experiments with their properties and discovers a number of magical cures. He then writes the standard Encyclopedia of Magical Plants. Voldemort: Ghost. mz_annethrope (the crystal ball knows) From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 8 11:59:18 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 11:59:18 -0000 Subject: Much obsessed by death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127308 Deborah wrote: > I wonder if the huge, climactic death of a megaprominent character is > the only way to get to a satisfying series ending. Right now, the list > seems to be measuring one character after another for shrouds! > > There's also the possibility of the same sort of thing on a wider > screen - let LV be defeated, and then let the WW voluntarily disband > in order to prevent any such disaster from arising again. The message > being: reject supernatural aids, and work at being the best version of > a human that you can achieve. These are children's books, after all. Hannah: That, for me, would be a very disappointing ending indeed. The thing I love about Harry Potter is the glamour and excitement of the magical world that JKR has created so near and yet so far from our own. If the series ends with it being destroyed completely, I will feel totally let down. It's one thing for the stories themselves to end with book 7, but I'd like to able to imagine the WW carrying on, and to read about it in fanfiction. This is, as you say, a children's book. Children deserve a little magic in their lives. How would the destruction of this enjoyable fantasy world possibly help children or teach them anything useful? People can work at being good humans while they are also wizards - magic is a gift and a tool, but it doesn't affect personality any more than any ability does. I know what you mean about measuring the characters up for shrouds (I'm definitely guilty of this one)! It does seem a bit morbid, but it is also a very interesting source of speculation. JKR herself has confirmed there will be more deaths, and I suppose it's necessary for the war to be plausible. I hope there's not too many - ie. no more than is necessary for the plot and for plausibility, but I doubt JKR will put in gratuitous and excessive murders, at least of actual known characters. There will be a few more deaths, at least two being of major characters, but it would be very nice for there to be a resolution that doesn't involve a mass killing of the characters we know and love. I suppose we'll have to wait a few years yet to know for sure! Hannah From riberam at glue.umd.edu Fri Apr 8 14:54:17 2005 From: riberam at glue.umd.edu (Maria Ribera) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 10:54:17 -0400 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127309 Sharon said: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: SNIP > No, I'm sticking to my prediction: Dumbledore dies. It's time for Harry to face LV without > "the only wizard he ever feared" as back-up. Now let's put the brakes on that thought for a minute please. Harry did face Voldemort without Dumbledore in PS/SS, COS, & GOF, mostly successfully. I can partially agree with your thought. I don't think Harry needs to face LV without DD. Harry needs to face life & the world itself without DD. Now me, Maria: I was just thinking of why I don't think Dumbledore will die in book six, and your email comes as a perfect starting point for mine. Sure, Harry has faced Voldemort several times without Dumbledore, but was he ready to defeat Voldemort either of those? Not really, I don't think he was. In PS/SS, he had his mother's protection. In COS he had Fawkes, the hat and the sword, that came from Dumbledore, so he was not really by himself. In GOF, it was a matter of wands, otherwise he would have been dead by now (if it hadn't been for the wands, I don't think his "Expelliarmus" would have had anything to do against Voldemorts Avada Kedavra). And in the Ministry confrontation, I don't think Harry would have been able to do much by himself either. Sure, he has learnt a lot through the book, but I don't think he is ready to defeat LV. I think Harry needs to learn A LOT from Dumbledore before confronting Voldemort, which he will, and alone, at the end of the series, in my opinion. I don't claim that Dumbledore will live to see LV defeated. But I am quite sure that he will stay for most of book 7 as well. I don't think Harry will learn everything he needs to know to win this war in one book. And, let's face it, Harry cannot rely on luck and external protection (mother's, Fawkes', wands...) to finally defeat Voldemort. He needs to learn about that power he has, how to handle it, how to work with it. He needs to know enough spells to stand a chance in front of Voldemort. And for that he is going to need a lot of help from Dumbledore. So, that is why I think Dumbledore will last till at least half of book 7. After that, I can't say what will happen. I will be very sad if he dies, but I will accept it as a natural think as he is really old and has lived a great life. Maria From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 8 15:15:02 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 15:15:02 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127310 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Maria Ribera wrote: >snip > > So, that is why I think Dumbledore will last till at least half of book > 7. After that, I can't say what will happen. I will be very sad if he > dies, but I will accept it as a natural think as he is really old and > has lived a great life. > > > Maria imamommy: If DD dies, wouldn't we all expect some kind of altercation with a DE or VM or something, a la Obiwan Kenobi? Wouldn't it be funny if DD just dropped dead of a heart attack? Not funny, but, you know, just unexpected. In some ways I would like this better; after all, I don't like the idea of my all-powerful mentor DD being bested by evil dudes he's been whooping for half a century. But even DD can't beat old age (at least, now that the Sorcerer's Stone is destroyed). I don't even think Fawkes could take something like that away from him. Doubtful if it will happen this way, it just made me think... imamommy From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 8 15:20:08 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 15:20:08 -0000 Subject: Opinions (was Harry's Motivation) (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127311 Lupinlore: Myself, if I paid good money (and spent an enormous amount of time) on a series only to have it end like that, the only lesson I'll remember is to read JKR's books in the library from now on (as I will with Stephen King after the Dark Tower, talk about a silly ending!) I suppose the books would make good door chocks, though. Potioncat: Seems to me, no matter how the series ends, you've gotten your money's worth already. But the books don't come "satisfaction guranteed" so perhaps you should put your name on the waiting list at your local library now. As for me, I don't see any reason to attach any stipulations to the books. I've enjoyed the ride so far, and I expect I will continue to. I may not like some of the events that will occur...I'm sure of that in real life too... I've made some predictions, guessed at some back stories and I'm waiting to see how I close I came to JKR's ideas, not how close she came to mine. Potioncat From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Apr 8 15:50:24 2005 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 15:50:24 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127312 Alla: > > In this speculation how did Sirius made Snape listen? Had he > > approached him in the Great Hall to make sure that he won't walk > > away? I see staged conversation as more likely possibility, IMO. > > You know what I am saying? I just don't see those two willingly > > coming into contact with each other, unless they want to hex > > each other or harm each other otherwise. > > I am not calling him a coward, on the contrary. I just don't see > > him CARING MUCH if someone else will think of him as coward, if > > the alternative is putting himself into the danger . > Valky: > How about Sirius taunts Snape with something like "I've been down > there, I know where it goes and why." or something to that effect > causing Snape to act on his jealous instincts to know and be in on > *at least* as much conspiracy as his enemy. Jen: Alla asks, what in the world would make Snape actually listen to Sirius, his sworn enemy? That's a fair question. Maybe as a first- year, like when Harry agreed to meet Draco for a duel, Snape would be conned into doing something foolhardy. Why as a sixth-year is Snape still compelled to act on Sirius' words? He can't possibly believe Sirius has his best interests at heart! And Snape has a choice after all; there's no canon indication Sirius literally dragged him into that situation. Carol postulated pride, or fear of being called a coward. That's entirely possible. If Draco is our Slytherin guide though, Snape isn't supposed to be beguiled by fear of being called a coward. He's supposed to save his skin. People extrapolate from the Pensieve incident in the fifth year that James and Sirius (especially) are bullies, and that they have spent most of their time at Hogwarts hounding Snape. If that's the case, and Snape not only hates James & Sirius, but he is also a victim of their bullying, it ups the ante even more--what in the world compelled him to go to the Whomping Willow that night? And it's not just the night of the Prank. Severus is somehow destined to take on dangerous situations by himself when a bit of planning and collaboration might serve him & others better. Like taking on Quirrell by himself in Book 1, or going to the Shrieking Shack in POA. Both potentially had dire consequences for quite a few people. (As an aside I think Snape is a victim of plot purposes at time; he's called on to fill an ambigious role in the story which causes his motivations to seem vague and unclear). In trying to postulate why this continues to happen, you can't overlook Snape's Achilles Heel--Curiousity. He's not one to let things be, or allow someone else to take over a situation in which he feels his prescence is necesary. I found his snide remark to Sirius about "wanting to feel involved" in OOTP a bit ironic, coming as it does from a character who prides himself on being at the right place at the right time. I'm left believing simple curiousity is primarily what led Snape to the Willow that night, along with hoping to get the Marauders in trouble as a delicious just dessert. The gauntlet was thrown by Sirius, and Snape couldn't leave it and walk away. And 20 years later his agenda hasn't changed remarkably, has it? Jen, thinking now how similar Snape and Harry are at times, when curiousity gets the better of them. ;) From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 16:17:37 2005 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:17:37 -0000 Subject: Rowling on HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127313 Rowling recently said of her new book: I like it [HBP] better than I liked Goblet, Phoenix or Chamber when I finished them. Even if nobody else likes it - and some won't - I know it will remain one of my favorites in the series. Ultimately you have to please yourself before you please anyone else." As for book 7 she said: "I dare say my fingers will itch for a pen before long, they usually do but I doubt I'll be doing any sustained writing for many months yet." Eggplant From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 17:28:56 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 17:28:56 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127314 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elady25" wrote: I don't like the > idea of my all-powerful mentor DD being bested by evil dudes he's > been whooping for half a century. But even DD can't beat old age (at > least, now that the Sorcerer's Stone is destroyed). I don't even > think Fawkes could take something like that away from him. > Tonks: I am sure that DD will never be defeated by the evil ones. Never! If he dies at all, it will not be at the hands of evil. DD will always defeat LV, or any other power of darkness and evil. Also DD will never kill. He is very powerful, more powerful that the LV's of the world because he does not sink to their level. And this he will teach to Harry as well. Harry does not have it in him to AK anyone, no matter how hurt and angry he may be. Tonks_op Who's very favorite is DD. From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Apr 8 17:30:24 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 17:30:24 -0000 Subject: Opinions (was Harry's Motivation) (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127315 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > Seems to me, no matter how the series ends, you've gotten your money's > worth already. But the books don't come "satisfaction guranteed" so > perhaps you should put your name on the waiting list at your local > library now. > > As for me, I don't see any reason to attach any stipulations to the > books. I've enjoyed the ride so far, and I expect I will continue to. > I may not like some of the events that will occur...I'm sure of that > in real life too... I've made some predictions, guessed at some back > stories and I'm waiting to see how I close I came to JKR's ideas, not > how close she came to mine. Chuckle. If HBP is anywhere near as abysmal of a book as OOTP, I probably will follow that advice. However, this does bring up an interesting question of how one approaches a set of books. I think there are several different ways, none of which is reallys superior to another. Perhaps there are two predominant ways, however: One way is as a work of art, or an adventure if you will. You sort of pay your cash (or not, as the case may be) and go along for the ride. You expect to find some pleasant and unpleasant things, but overall accept it as an aesthetic experience, whatever that means to you (I think some people are primarily emotional in their approach and some primarily intellectual). The other is to approach the books as a product that one invests in, whether it be time or money. As with any product you expect a certain return for your investment. The question of whether you have invested wisely or not is mainly decided by whether the return matches the value of the expenditure. Now, these two ways are certainly not mutually exclusive. And any given person can employ one method in any one given instance and another method in another given instance. However, I think most people lean in the main one way or another. So, how one reacts to the Harry Potter series as a whole will depend to a large extent on what type of person you are. If you are primarily "aesthetic" in your approach, then you will apply one set of values that add up to - did I have a superior aesthetic experience? If, however, you are - as I tend to be - primarily "economic" in your approach, you will apply another (not necessarily exclusive) set of values that say - did I receive appropriate compensation for my investment? Interestingly, the two sides are not usually well-defined and/or clearly opposed to one another. Generally on any given subject, you will have some "aesthetic" and "economic" types on one side, and some "aesthetic" and "economic" types on another. Where they differ primarily is in their attitude to books and authors. In general aesthetic readers value books as works of art and authors as artists. The value of each depends on certain measures of quality and achievement. Economic types value books as products designed to fulfill a function and authors as producers. The value of each depends on the fluctuating needs/demands of the individual consumer and the marketplace. Also, interestingly enough, I think this aspect of one's personality is largely independent of other personality functions. I reliably test as an INFP on Meyers-Briggs, which is the constellation most expected to be aesthetic, yet I've been ruthlessly "economic" my entire reading life. A good friend, however, who is a retired high energy physicist and an ESTJ to the core, is the greatest "aesthetic" reader of my personal acquaintance. Each side can be very demanding, but demanding in different ways. It is a difference that is probably fundamental among readers, and is in and of itself neither a good nor a bad thing. It is simply an irreducible aspect of the public that buys and/or reads books. Lupinlore From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 8 17:58:43 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 17:58:43 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127316 Jen: > Alla asks, what in the world would make Snape actually listen > to Sirius, his sworn enemy? That's a fair question. Maybe as a > first-year, like when Harry agreed to meet Draco for a duel, Snape > would be conned into doing something foolhardy. Why as a sixth-year > is Snape still compelled to act on Sirius' words? He can't possibly > believe Sirius has his best interests at heart! And Snape has a > choice after all; there's no canon indication Sirius literally > dragged him into that situation. SSSusan: This is an excellent point. Without absolving Sirius of any guilt -- because he WAS very likely guilty of trying to harm Snape -- Jen is correct that it certainly doesn't appear Sirius shoved Snape into the WW nor had any "hold" over him which would compel him to do go. Snape was 16 or so! Why did he fall for it? Why did he *choose* to do this? Jen: > And it's not just the night of the Prank. Severus is somehow > destined to take on dangerous situations by himself when a bit of > planning and collaboration might serve him & others better. Like > taking on Quirrell by himself in Book 1, or going to the Shrieking > Shack in POA. Both potentially had dire consequences for quite a > few people. SSSusan: Might I plug my idea of Narcissistic!Snape again? :-) This is *exactly* the kind of thing a narcissist would do, no? Seeing a way to be the hero, perhaps? Believing in his superiority or ability to handle things better than anyone else? In the Shrieking Shack instance, perhaps it was Snape thinking, "If *I* can pull this off, if *I* can bring in Sirius all by myself, I'll be the hero, people will KNOW how special I am." Again, it'd be about validation and building up the ego. Jen: > In trying to postulate why this continues to happen, you can't > overlook Snape's Achilles Heel--Curiousity. SSSusan: Of course, this is possible, too -- that Snape's just a Nosey Parker! ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From lealess at yahoo.com Thu Apr 7 23:16:31 2005 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2005 23:16:31 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127317 I've been following this discussion with interest. I am not a psychologist, and what I know of narcissism I've read here. Even so, is it possible that Snape is just extremely introverted and not necessarily narcissistic? He would still be self-referential in most of his dealings with others, but it would be a reference to internal standards, instead of a striving for external validation, that would make it difficult for him to understand or even tolerate others. His anger could come from being stuck in a situation in which he is not comfortable, i.e., having to be with people, especially those who do not fit his expectations (probably unrealistic) of others. He does seem to want to be listened to, but then ... who doesn't? I know few people who want to be discounted. Is it possible the only measure he really cares about is an internal one, that he would value justice, decorum, duty, etc., according to the standard he sets for himself (perhaps too high or inflexible) over the external validation of a medal or maybe even Dumbledore's approval? Perhaps this explains the scene Harry witnessed regarding the Order of Merlin, which might not have been about the award at all. It might have been the disappointment of not seeing Black pay for what Snape still believed to be his crimes, that and the stress of being near that person, and a werewolf, and being knocked out by three students...all in all, a lot of stress. Perhaps his internal sense of what is right is what keeps him doing the work that Dumbledore asks of him. It may also be what sets him against rulebreakers. He may (or may not) even have relatively high self-esteem, but again, it might not be dependent on the opinions of others (much as his appearance could reflect his idea of what's really important, either that or a dislike of water). As for cruelty and anger towards children ... I see him as someone who just would be happier on his own. Dumbledore's probably well- meant scheme to get him socializing and worse, interacting with children, is a tremendous failure. If Snape is extremely introverted, it might be impossible for him to change his personality and actually welcome being around others. His self- containment probably saves him as a spy, though. I agree he needs to let the past go, but I don't think the inability to do that is a creation of narcissism. ??? lealess From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 19:21:24 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:21:24 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? Something out of Nothing. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127318 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lea" wrote: > JKR's statement about Flitwick being in only six books is probably > because that is all that has been written. However, I will not deny > that she is crafty and clever, and it could have possibly been her > *hint* to those astute enough to catch it (and therefore, kudo's to > you!). > > ...edited,... > > Guess we'll all find out in July. > > ~ Lea bboyminn: I wonder if JKR isn't just being coy with us. Rather than dropping an intended or unintended hint, she is instead being very consciously non-commital. She is carefully wording her statement in a way that leaves the 7th book wide open to any and all possibilities. So rather than overtly or covertly telling us something, she is going out of her way to tell us nothing, and make us aware that she is telling us nothing. But of course, as obsessed as we are we will undoubtly turn even the slightest nothing into a very bid something. Which, by the way, I think JKR is beginning to enjoy; driving us nuts that is. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 8 16:34:38 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 16:34:38 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127319 Something that I've only just thought of while reading the latest few posts is: asuming that Harry does kill LV at somepoint towards the end to fulfill the prophecy, presumably he'll need to perform an AK on him (assuming he doesn't stab or shoot him, which I cannot envisage). If he does do that, will he then promptly be carted off to Azkaban for using (the worst) one of the unforgivable curses, as IIRC that is the punishment for using one on another human. Just a thought, I'd love to know what you all think. Karen From kennymod at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 17:08:21 2005 From: kennymod at yahoo.com (kennymod) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 17:08:21 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127320 imamommy: > if DD just dropped dead of a heart attack? Not funny, but, > you know, just unexpected. Nobody will have a heart attack, if they have not had one already. I have always thought JKR is making fun of healthy eating when she writes about the feasts and just the regular breakfasts and other meals -- piling on high cholesterol foods one after another. I am sure it's a joke, that it would be magical to eat fatty and cholesterol laden food without worry. Either that or the wizard world all are on high doses of Baycol or other statin -- it's not like you hear DD saying he needs to go walk on the treadmill. "kennymod" From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 19:40:29 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:40:29 -0000 Subject: Flitwick dead? Pat on the Head. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Lea" wrote: > > > > Tonks wrote: > > > Maybe something to do with the fact that he is part > > > goblin. > Dave > > Um... He *is*?? Is this Canon? And if so, why didn't Umbridge > > persecute *him*? > Lea: > Yes, apparently he is. ... > > Quote from website: > > "He is human but with a dash of goblin ancestry - something like > a great, great grandfather." > > Why Umbridge didn't persecute him is a good question. She must > not have known. > > ~ Lea bboyminn: Well, post volume seems relatively low, so perhaps I can drop in a short post. Why didn't Umbridge persecute Flitwick? Because he is a tame, docile, compliant, and submissive-to-her-authority Half-Breed, and that's just the way she likes her half-breeds. By contrast, Lupin, Hagrid, and the Centaurs are untame, undocile, uncompliant, and so very very NON-submissive-to-her-authority. Umbridge plays the 'Power Game'. In the Power Game, those who have it, have it absolutely, and those who don't...don't. Anything that challenges that order must be quashed with /extreme prejudice/. Hence, werewolves can't have jobs, but docile Charms Professors can have a condescending pat on the head. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From jferer at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 19:42:19 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 19:42:19 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127322 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen Barker" wrote: > > Something that I've only just thought of while reading the latest > few posts is: asuming that Harry does kill LV at somepoint towards > the end to fulfill the prophecy, presumably he'll need to perform > an AK on him (assuming he doesn't stab or shoot him, which I cannot envisage). If he does do that, will he then promptly be carted off > to Azkaban for using (the worst) one of the unforgivable curses, as > IIRC that is the punishment for using one on another human. Consider this when you think of how Harry could end Voldemort: Voldemort is not naturally alive. His existence is only maintained by the operation of magic. Harry and Voldemort are linked. Their fates are intertwined, perhaps totally intertwined. Then ask this: Of the two, Harry and Voldemort, who are linked, what would happen to the other if one of them lost his magic? What would happen to Voldemort if magic left him? From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 20:06:32 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 20:06:32 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127323 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen Barker" > presumably he'll need to perform > an AK on him (assuming he doesn't stab or shoot him, which I cannot envisage). If he does do that, will he then promptly be carted off > to Azkaban for using (the worst) one of the unforgivable curses, as > IIRC that is the punishment for using one on another human. GEO: Not necessarily. Considering that an AK backleash only made Voldemort incorporeal and destroyed his first body in 1981, I really don't think another AK or magic of similar destructive capacity would have been capable of killing him though it would probably render him incorporeal again. As to how Harry will kill Voldemort no doubt it's tied to the ingredients that Voldemort used in his rebirthing ritual (possibly Harry's blood), the gleam of triumph that Harry sees in DD's eyes in GoF, what exactly Voldemort did to himself to render himself incapable of dying and the power that the Dark Lord Knows Not that Harry himself has From jaanise at hello.lv Fri Apr 8 19:58:18 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 22:58:18 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Much obsessed by death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c53c75$4fe7d200$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 127324 -----Original Message----- From: Deborah There's also the possibility of the same sort of thing on a wider screen - let LV be defeated, and then let the WW voluntarily disband in order to prevent any such disaster from arising again. The message being: reject supernatural aids, and work at being the best version of a human that you can achieve. These are children's books, after all. -------------------------- Janis: I highly doubt about this ending. Because WW seems odd and supernatural only from Muggle's (Deborah's, for example) point of view. All our scientific achievements may seem unnatural to the wizards. (They may want *us* to stop it for a better world...) Even if the magical power can get highly dangerous when used as a weapon, it's the same in the Muggle world. And no one really discontinues doing research on technology even when we know that the knowledge can either help us much or kill us - those two possibilities go side by side. So, such conclusion would be meaningless either way. WW are too big and these two worlds are too interwined for finishing of WW to be some kind of solution, or even having any point in it. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 8 20:39:46 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 20:39:46 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127325 lealess wrote: > ... is it possible that Snape is just extremely introverted and not > necessarily narcissistic? He would still be self-referential in > most of his dealings with others, but it would be a reference to > internal standards, instead of a striving for external validation, > that would make it difficult for him to understand or even tolerate > others. His anger could come from being stuck in a situation in > which he is not comfortable, i.e., having to be with people, > especially those who do not fit his expectations (probably > unrealistic) of others. SSSusan: I think you're right that Snape is introverted, for certain, and that he is uncomfortable in some of the settings in which we find him. But hmmmm... why *are* those expectations of others unrealistic? Introversion alone wouldn't really explain that, I don't think. Where did those standards come from? lealess: > Is it possible the only measure he really cares about is an > internal one, that he would value justice, decorum, duty, etc., > according to the standard he sets for himself (perhaps too high or > inflexible) over the external validation of a medal or maybe even > Dumbledore's approval? Perhaps his internal sense of what > is right is what keeps him doing the work that Dumbledore asks of > him. It may also be what sets him against rulebreakers. SSSusan: There may very well be some internal measure that Snape is very attached to, which determines the standards which he sets for himself. Just as you don't *necessarily* see narcissist in him, I don't necessarily see *not* narcissist in his having an internal code of sorts. Are these incompatible, I guess I'm asking? OTOH, I'm not sure that I can agree that Snape values his own "internal measure" over DD's approval. I think DD's approval/validation is VERY important to Snape. Otherwise, how can we explain Snape's backing down when DD challenges him ["Guilty until proven innocent, Severus", "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus", the Ford Anglia punishment scene, ...]? If Snape is sooo ruled by an internal code that it overrides anything else, and his standards are occasionally different from DD's [e.g., rulebreaking], one might expect him to continue to argue his position, rather than backing down. As for his position about rulebreakers, who was it who said Snape is hung up on the rules in a hall-monitorish way? (I love that.) Is he hung up on them for reasons of principle and high moral standards? Or is he hung up on them because he can't stand people getting away with things, people sneaking around & doing things? Methinks Snape doesn't care for kids going against his authority. Siriusly Snapey Susan From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 8 21:03:09 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 21:03:09 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127326 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elady25" wrote: > I don't like the > > idea of my all-powerful mentor DD being bested by evil dudes he's > > been whooping for half a century. But even DD can't beat old age (at > > least, now that the Sorcerer's Stone is destroyed). I don't even > > think Fawkes could take something like that away from him. > > > > Tonks: > I am sure that DD will never be defeated by the evil ones. Never! If he > dies at all, it will not be at the hands of evil. DD will always defeat > LV, or any other power of darkness and evil. Also DD will never kill. > He is very powerful, more powerful that the LV's of the world because > he does not sink to their level. And this he will teach to Harry as > well. Harry does not have it in him to AK anyone, no matter how hurt > and angry he may be. > > Tonks_op > Who's very favorite is DD. So, what sort of demise do you see in store for him, if any? a sacrifice for Harry, being caught in an explosion, choking on a chicken bone? Lots of folks think DD could die before the series is over, but I haven't seen a lot of theories on how. imamommy From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 8 21:18:46 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 21:18:46 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127327 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen Barker" wrote: > > Something that I've only just thought of while reading the latest > few posts is: asuming that Harry does kill LV at somepoint towards > the end to fulfill the prophecy, presumably he'll need to perform > an AK on him (assuming he doesn't stab or shoot him, which I cannot envisage). If he does do that, will he then promptly be carted off > to Azkaban for using (the worst) one of the unforgivable curses, as > IIRC that is the punishment for using one on another human. > > Just a thought, I'd love to know what you all think. > > Karen I'm still staking my claim on my overly elaborate, highly unlikely, but fun to think about anyway theory: Somehow, the Dementors take care of VM. To elaborate, I think somehow Harry will somehow have VM inside him at the time, through posession or otherwise, and the Dementors will kiss Harry but only suck out VM's soul. My rationale, which is, admittedly thin, is this: the Dementors, and paricularly their kissing ability, is what scares Harry the most. Also, this quote from the World Book Day chat: "Will Harry be receiving a second kiss in his last two years at Hogwarts? ;)" "He might well be receiving another kiss (or two) but I'm not saying who the kisser's going to be." That sounds like good ol' JKR twisting things around to me, and helped me formulate this idea that somehow, Harry has got to go through a Dementor's kiss and survive it somehow. This would also fit the bill for a symbolic death/resurrection if that is required. Also, the Dementors don't seem like terribly loyal followers, so they may finish Voldy off just 'cause they are thirsty. So maybe this sounds crazy, and I apologize to those who thought it was crazy the first ten times I posted it, but it's my story and I'm sticking to it. And if I'm right, my DH owes me a nice dinner out. imamommy From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 22:25:28 2005 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 15:25:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050408222528.91511.qmail@web52706.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127328 elady25 wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elady25" wrote: > I don't like the > > idea of my all-powerful mentor DD being bested by evil dudes he's > > been whooping for half a century. But even DD can't beat old age (at > > least, now that the Sorcerer's Stone is destroyed). I don't even > > think Fawkes could take something like that away from him. > > > > Tonks: > I am sure that DD will never be defeated by the evil ones. Never! If he > dies at all, it will not be at the hands of evil. DD will always defeat > LV, or any other power of darkness and evil. Also DD will never kill. > He is very powerful, more powerful that the LV's of the world because > he does not sink to their level. And this he will teach to Harry as > well. Harry does not have it in him to AK anyone, no matter how hurt > and angry he may be. > > Tonks_op > Who's very favorite is DD. So, what sort of demise do you see in store for him, if any? a sacrifice for Harry, being caught in an explosion, choking on a chicken bone? Lots of folks think DD could die before the series is over, but I haven't seen a lot of theories on how. imamommy Griffin782002 now: I am not sure if I want to see DD die. I mean it might look too much like what happened to Gandalf. Of course we don't know yet, we have to wait. And if you kill DD, isn't it obvious that LV will run wild. And Harry is still learning. Griffin782002 who had the idea of stepping into a big blue box and can't find the way out (fustrating isn't it). I did the same when I was about eight...... 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 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!? Make Yahoo! your home page [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 8 23:32:48 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 23:32:48 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV - Dementors through the Veil In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127329 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elady25" wrote: > imamommy: > > I'm still staking my claim on my overly elaborate, highly unlikely, > but fun to think about anyway theory: Somehow, the Dementors take > care of VM. To elaborate, I think somehow Harry will somehow have > VM inside him at the time, through posession or otherwise, and the > Dementors will kiss Harry but only suck out VM's soul. > > My rationale, which is, admittedly thin, is this: the Dementors, and > paricularly their kissing ability, is what scares Harry the most. > Also, this quote from the World Book Day chat: > > ,,,edited,,, > > So maybe this sounds crazy, ... it's my story and I'm > sticking to it. And if I'm right, my DH owes me a nice dinner out. > > imamommy bboyminn: I don't know if I buy your theory, but it's no more far-fetched than my Harry and Voldie go through the Veil theory. It's is possible that the reason the Dementor are so strongly drawn to Harry, is that they sense Voldemort in him. One could speculate that somehow Voldemort has some control over the Dementors. When I say 'control' I'm thinking more along the lines of something like blackmail, or some coercive power. Certainly, he can offer the Dementors a wider range of 'Food' than the Ministry will allow, and I'm sure the Dementors like that, but I'm looking for some excuse for the Dementors to resent Voldemort, to have a grudge against him. Or perhaps, it's simply something in Voldemort's tormented past that make him ideal Dementor food. So, the point is, that it's really Voldemort that the Dementors desire, and that's why they are drawn to Harry, because they sense a piece of Voldemort in him. So, I don't see it any harder to fantasize a means by which they are maneuvered into a position where Voldemort has possessed Harry, or here's a twist, HARRY has possessed Voldemort, than for me to maneuvere the gang into a situation when H&V go through the Veil together. In your scenario, the Dementors, in that moment in which H&V are conjoined, sense a vulnerability in Voldemort and attack, Suck out Voldie's soul and either leave Harry's behind or someone intervenes to prevent the Dementors from getting Harry too. By the way, in one of my many 'Through the Veil' scenarios, Harry does have the power to Possess. Further, the one who is the possessor, has power to control the possessee. I Harry is the Possessor, he can control Voldemort...cool. So, Harry possessing Voldemort drags him into the Veil, or in your case, entices the Dementors to come and get him. I feel very deeply, that Harry's power to Possess is actually going to appear in the story It's just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From kking0731 at gmail.com Fri Apr 8 23:40:57 2005 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 23:40:57 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127330 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen Barker" > wrote: > > > > Something that I've only just thought of while reading the latest > > few posts is: asuming that Harry does kill LV at somepoint towards > > the end to fulfill the prophecy, presumably he'll need to perform > > an AK on him (assuming he doesn't stab or shoot him, which I cannot > envisage). If he does do that, will he then promptly be carted off > > to Azkaban for using (the worst) one of the unforgivable curses, as > > IIRC that is the punishment for using one on another human. > > Consider this when you think of how Harry could end Voldemort: > > Voldemort is not naturally alive. His existence is only maintained by > the operation of magic. > > Harry and Voldemort are linked. Their fates are intertwined, perhaps > totally intertwined. > > Then ask this: Of the two, Harry and Voldemort, who are linked, what > would happen to the other if one of them lost his magic? What would > happen to Voldemort if magic left him? Consider this when you think of how Harry could end Voldemort: Voldemort is not naturally alive. His existence is only maintained by the operation of magic. Harry and Voldemort are linked. Their fates are intertwined, perhaps totally intertwined. Then ask this: Of the two, Harry and Voldemort, who are linked, what would happen to the other if one of them lost his magic? What would happen to Voldemort if magic left him? Snow: I think you hit the nail on the head but then again it fits my theory nicely, 'Satellite Harry'. :-) If Harry has all of Voldemort's powers (except the one power that Voldy was left with, possession) but the connection between them allows Voldemort access to those powers, all Harry has to do is deny access. Harry doesn't realize the connection yet so he can't deny access until he does there goes that Occlumency thingy. If Harry can realize the magic that was bestowed upon him and deny the use through Occlumency, Voldemort has no magic beyond his possession device. What made me think of this is when you said, "What would happen to the other" if one of them lost their magic. The prophecy "other" comes to mind in bright light. May just be my warped thinking again Snow From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 00:13:50 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 00:13:50 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127331 Jim Ferer (me): Consider this when you think of how Harry could end Voldemort: Voldemort is not naturally alive. His existence is only maintained by the operation of magic. Harry and Voldemort are linked. Their fates are intertwined, perhaps totally intertwined. Then ask this: Of the two, Harry and Voldemort, who are linked, what would happen to the other if one of them lost his magic? What would happen to Voldemort if magic left him? Snow: I think you hit the nail on the head but then again it fits my theory nicely, 'Satellite Harry'. :-) If Harry has all of Voldemort's powers (except the one power that Voldy was left with, possession) but the connection between them allows Voldemort access to those powers, all Harry has to do is deny access. Harry doesn't realize the connection yet so he can't deny access until he does there goes that Occlumency thingy. If Harry can realize the magic that was bestowed upon him and deny the use through Occlumency, Voldemort has no magic beyond his possession device. What made me think of this is when you said, "What would happen to the other" if one of them lost their magic. The prophecy "other" comes to mind in bright light. May just be my warped thinking again Jim again: Interesting take on it. Here's mine, and I realize I've posted it before, but it never got any comment: If Harry destroys his own ability to do magic, then magic will leave Voldemort, too, and he will cease to exist. This will be Harry's ultimate sacrifice, giving up the thing that saved him from his misery at the Dursley's and made him special. After this kind of death, Harry will be "reborn" into the love and adulation of his friends and the wizarding world. His ability to love - love enough to make the sacrifice - remains, because it's the power Voldemort knows not. This hypothesis is attractive to me because it's the most heartwrenching sacrifice Harry could ever make, more than his physical life, even, and a harder decision. There's been discussion of religious parallels before with respect to Harry, and they're obvious in this scenario. And Harry, Frodo-like, saves the world for everyone but himself. It works for JKR's themes and the ideas of sacrifice and love JKR's been giving us. There's no evidence for this, but here's a clue we might see in HBP or Book 7: if we hear of someone who's had the magic taken away from him or her, or deliberately destroyed it (Petunia?), then I'll take it as a foreshadowing. Jim Ferer From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Sat Apr 9 01:07:12 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 09:07:12 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <1112589548.20056.75153.m18@yahoogroups.com> References: <1112589548.20056.75153.m18@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127332 Money is one of the first things Harry Potter is introduced to in the wizarding world. On his first trip to Diagon Alley Hagrid takes him to his Gringott's vault, which is bulging with galleons, sickles and knuts. This contrasts painfully with the Weasley family vault which in The Chamber of Secrets contains a 'very small' pile of silver sickles and a single gold galleon.1 The financial woes of the Weasley family - as constantly decried sotto voice by Ron - stem partly from the unusually large size of their family. For example, when the Weasleys meet Cedric Diggory and his father on their way to the quidditch world cup, Amos Diggory greets the Weasleys with a comment about the cost of buying tickets for so many children. 'Quidditch World Cup, wouldn't miss it for a sackful of galleons - and the tickets cost about that. Mind you,looks like I got off easy...' Amos Diggory peered good-naturedly around at the three Weasley boys, Harry, Hermione and Ginny. 'All these yours, Arthur?' 'Oh, no, only the redheads,' said Mr Wesley, pointing out his children.2 There were, of course, a further three red heads waiting at the camp site. More viciously, Lucius Malfoy suggests that the Weasleys would have had to sell their house to afford the tickets. However, it is revealed that Arthur Weasley did not actually have to buy his tickets - they were donated by the dodgy Ludo Bagman (whose very name reeks of implied bribery). 'I like Ludo... He was the one who got us such good tickets for the Cup. I did him a bit of a favour: his brother, Otto, got into a spot of trouble - a lawnmower with unnatural powers - I smoothed the whole thing over.'3 Small gifts and favours of this sort seem to be constantly traded among wizards. In The Prisoner of Azkaban Arthur borrows a car from work. In The Goblet of Fire a friend of his attaches the Dursley's fireplace to the floo network as a favour. Arthur says, 'I've got a useful contact at the Floor Regulation Panel and he fixed it for me.'4 This suggests, disturbingly, a culture of daily, petty corruption in the Ministry of Magic. This presents the possibility of further, more sinister, corruption. I am not suggesting that Arthur Weasley is corrupt, but it is clear that his work would present opportunities for such behaviour. He is first introduced when he comes home after a night of raids, work where he acts as a kind of unsupervised Police officer (with all the opportunities for graft that presents). He mentions too that related divisions of the Ministry of Magic have the authority to detain and question people. 'Mortlake was taken away for questioning about some extremely odd ferrets, but that's the Committee on Experimental Charms, thank goodness...'5 The mind boggles at the prospect of enchanted ferrets - what possible use can there be for such a thing? - and the blackmail opportunities that knowledge of such oddities (or perversities) implies. The Weasley's poverty is, however, a sign that Arthur does not take up such opportunities for illicit profit. At the same time, it is clear that some wizards and witches at the Ministry of Magic do indulge in more sinister forms of corruption and bribery, some of which support the actions of Voldemort. When Harry runs into a meeting between Fudge and Malfoy at the Ministry of Magic in The Order of the Phoenix he notes the 'gentle clinking of what sounded like a full pocket of gold'. Harry then naively asks Arthur about the meeting: 'What private business have they got together, anyway?' 'Gold, I expect,' said Mr Weasley angrily. 'Malfoy's been giving generously to all sorts of things for years... gets him in with the right people... then he can ask favours... delay laws he doesn't want past... oh he's very well connected, Lucius Malfoy.'6 This kind of evil - turning a blind eye to the second rise of Voldemort - is the nadir of corruption in the wizarding world. The wizarding world appears to operate with an informal bureaucracy and a culture of acceptance of low-level favour exchanges or even corruption. Arthur Weasley clearly participates in the exchange of favours but appears to shun bribery and venal corruption. In this context, the poverty of the Weasleys is perhaps the strongest indicator of Arthur's ethics and commitment to the forces of good. End Notes 1, J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (Great Britain: Bloomsbury, 1998) p.47. 2, J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (Great Britain: Bloomsbury, 2000) p. 68. 3, Rowling, Goblet of Fire (2000) p. 58. 4, Rowling, Goblet of Fire (2000) p.44. 5, Rowling, Chamber of Secrets (1998) p.34. 6, J.K. Rowling, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (Great Britain: Bloomsbury, 2003) pp. 141-2. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 01:29:32 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 01:29:32 -0000 Subject: Opinions (was Harry's Motivation) (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127333 Potioncat: Seems to me, no matter how the series ends, you've gotten your money's worth already. But the books don't come "satisfaction guranteed" so perhaps you should put your name on the waiting list at your local library now. As for me, I don't see any reason to attach any stipulations to the books. I've enjoyed the ride so far, and I expect I will continue to. I may not like some of the events that will occur...I'm sure of that in real life too... I've made some predictions, guessed at some back stories and I'm waiting to see how I close I came to JKR's ideas, not how close she came to mine. Lupinlore: However, this does bring up an interesting question of how one approaches a set of books. I think there are several different ways, none of which is reallys superior to another. Perhaps there are two predominant ways, however: One way is as a work of art, or an adventure if you will. You sort of pay your cash (or not, as the case may be) and go along for the ride. You expect to find some pleasant and unpleasant things, but overall accept it as an aesthetic experience, whatever that means to you (I think some people are primarily emotional in their approach and some primarily intellectual). The other is to approach the books as a product that one invests in, whether it be time or money. As with any product you expect a certain return for your investment. So, how one reacts to the Harry Potter series as a whole will depend to a large extent on what type of person you are. If you are primarily "aesthetic" in your approach, then you will apply one set of values that add up to - did I have a superior aesthetic experience? If, however, you are - as I tend to be - primarily "economic" in your approach, you will apply another (not necessarily exclusive) set of values that say - did I receive appropriate compensation for my investment? In general aesthetic readers value books as works of art and authors as artists. The value of each depends on certain measures of quality and achievement. Economic types value books as products designed to fulfill a function and authors as producers. The value of each depends on the fluctuating needs/demands of the individual consumer and the marketplace. Alla: Hm, we have to disagree sometimes, right? My approach is the same as Potioncat, I think. But I am very very curious to understand yours. Not being sarcastic, or anything, but could you please clarify. How could you employ economic approach for the work of fiction like this? I mean I perfectly understand the economic approach to the non- fictional books. For example, I expect from the legal books I own to help me do my job. That is the DEFINITE result I expect from reading these books. What kind of definite result can you get from reading Harry Potter? What kind of function in your own words do you expect those books to perform? I am just genuinely confused, because I don't realy see how HP can be approached in any other way as work of art, whether you feel it or think about it. I mean the only "return of my investment" so to speak I can expect from these books is whether I indeed had a great aesthetic experience. Can you please explain in more details what do you expect? As I already mentioned earlier I realised that I did not enjoy OOP as much as I thought I did, but how can I measure my enjoynment in definite terms? What ARE those terms? That blasted Dumbledore's speech at the end for example :o) It just does not ring true to my ears, it does not flow, it leaves me emotionally and intellectually unsatisfied. How can it be tranferred to non- appropriate compensation for the investment? I have a feeling I probably misunderstood you. :o) JMO, Alla From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 9 03:10:31 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 03:10:31 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127334 Jen: Severus is somehow destined to take on dangerous situations by himself when a bit of planning and collaboration might serve him & others better. Like taking on Quirrell by himself in Book 1, or going to the Shrieking Shack in POA. Bookworm: Doesn't this sound a bit like another young wizard we know?? Tendency toward rescuing people, acting before thinking things through... Could it be they are much more alike than either would like to think about? Ravenclaw Bookworm From tmar78 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 04:45:01 2005 From: tmar78 at yahoo.com (tyler maroney) Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2005 21:45:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Question about Flitwick/Sorcerer's Stone In-Reply-To: <1113016283.49622.36304.m30@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20050409044501.98456.qmail@web14123.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127336 In the latest update to the rumours section of JKR's website, she mentions a passage in Sorcerer's Stone in which Prof. Flitwich mentions how much he liked Lily when she was a student. Does anyone know in which chapter this reference may be found? I've been searching like crazy and I can't find it (or remember it for that matter). Tyler www.redmeat.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 03:43:00 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 03:43:00 -0000 Subject: Rowling on HBP Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127337 eggplant said: > Rowling recently said of her new book: >I like it [HBP] better than I liked Goblet, Phoenix or Chamber when I >finished them. Even if nobody else likes it - and some won't - I know >it will remain one of my favorites in the series. Ultimately you have >to please yourself before you please anyone else." I find this very comforting. If she likes HBP better than those three, then it must be great. If she's happy with it then I will be satisfied. After all, it's her world we are all so enthralled with. I bet, just as the first 5 books were all so different from each other, that JKR will continue to surprise us. We base our ideas on canon, but we don't know what new things she may have up her sleave. It will be nice to be surprised. The knowledge that she's happy with it indicates to me that she put into it just the amount of time and imagination that it needed. I'm glad she is doing her own thing and not bowing to public opinion. Hooray for JKR. Bonnie (too old for Harry, but I love him dearly) From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 9 03:46:20 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 03:46:20 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127338 Jim Ferer wrote: > Then ask this: Of the two, Harry and Voldemort, who are linked, what > would happen to the other if one of them lost his magic? What would > happen to Voldemort if magic left him? > If Harry destroys his own ability to do magic, After this kind of death, Harry will be "reborn" into the love and adulation of his friends and the wizarding world. His ability to love - love enough to make the sacrifice - remains, because it's the power Voldemort knows not. > > This hypothesis is attractive to me because it's the most > heartwrenching sacrifice Harry could ever make, And Harry, Frodo-like, saves the world for everyone > but himself. That's a really good answer and it's got me thinking alright. If Harry did sacrifice his magic, he'd have to go back to living as a muggle and would lose day-to-day contact with the WW, and Ron, Hermione etc (if still alive, which in this instance would be more moving if they were) would carry on being witches/wizards without him. Perhaps it would be kinder for someone to perform a memory altering charm so that Harry forgot all about everything. We would then come full circle. Harry would be famous in the WW, his name known to every man, woman and child and there probably really would be a 'Harry Potter Day' and Harry would once again be completely oblivious to the whole thing. I hope not though! On a slight tangent it was mentioned that magic was 'bestowed' on Harry by LV's AK on him as a baby. What about the possibility that he was actually born a squib and *all* his magical ability came from LV? Therefore once the connection between them was broken he was left as a squib again etc etc Karen From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 04:53:16 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 04:53:16 -0000 Subject: Goblins/Flitwick and involvement in the OoTP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127339 > > ***Marcela: > I also wonder why Dumbledore has not used Flitwick as a liason > speaker with the Goblins -at least it wasn't mentioned in OoTP... > Chys: I was wondering why/if, is Flitwick in the Order at all? When there were supposed to have been no teachers aside from Snape that Harry could go to about the Order and Sirius, why was Flitwick left out of this? He was there when Umbridge was causing havock, when Snape was there, and when MG was in ST. Mungos so then why couldn't Harry have gone to him? I don't remember reading him being in the Order HQ at any point in time, even. If he's not in the order then he wouldn't be a good liason speaker, would he? Chys, confused per usual. From lealess at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 04:57:53 2005 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 04:57:53 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127340 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" > SSSusan: > SSSusan: > OTOH, I'm not sure that I can agree that Snape values his > own "internal measure" over DD's approval. I think DD's > approval/validation is VERY important to Snape. lealess: Actually, I agree! I think Dumbledore is important to Snape, but not for narcissistic reasons. > > As for his position about rulebreakers, who was it who said Snape is > hung up on the rules in a hall-monitorish way? (I love that.) Is he > hung up on them for reasons of principle and high moral standards? > Or is he hung up on them because he can't stand people getting away > with things, people sneaking around & doing things? Methinks Snape > doesn't care for kids going against his authority. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan lealess: One of the things Snape probably has to do as a teacher is to make students aware of rules, both internal Hogwarts rules and external wizarding world rules. He may not like it or even agree with all the rules, but he probably understands why they exist. Not following certain rules could have serious consequences, for Hogwarts, for the individuals involved, and for third parties who rely on others to behave in an above-board manner ... not to mention Snape, since it is no doubt part of his job to enforce rules. He is faced with people who continually flout rules, often openly, often unintentionally, even after being informed many times of their existence, although perhaps not their rationale. If he is faced with rule-breaking continuously, yet never gets any support when he tries to enforce the rules, I can see where it would drive him around the bend. How many times does he have to hit people over the head to get the message through? Yes, Snape is sadistic, and he is bullying. Perhaps he sees this cruel behavior as the only way to get through to some people, or again, perhaps it is the result of really rather not wanting to bother, as an introvert. I think he probably also sees rules as a touchstone to a sane existence, i.e., if rules are followed by everyone, it might make life more simple and just across the board. Less strife = happier Snape. So, it might not have anything to do with authority or self-esteem issues, or even moral standards. It might just be the frustrations of the job he probably didn't choose. Not that I personally agree with this view of rules, but I think I can understand it. lealess From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 05:55:58 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 05:55:58 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127341 >>Betsy: >I've been long confused as to why folks think Snape is making a mountain out of a mole-hill regarding the Prank. He. Nearly. DIED. That's huge.> >>SSSusan: >FWIW, since you included a snip of my post before responding with this comment, I would like to remark that the issue of whether Snape should or shouldn't be angry about the prank wasn't a part of anything I was arguing. (Yup, I'd have been angry, too.)< Betsy: I included that snip of your post for two fairly different reasons. 1) I didn't want to snip Magda's funny (because if something's funny once, it *must* be repeated *g*), and I needed your post to feed into the one-liner. 2) I did misunderstand what you were saying. I thought you were saying that for Snape to still be upset about his near murder was, basically, crazy. >>SSSusan: >I was pointing out that I believe Snape is a good fit for the *clinical* definition of a narcissistic personality, as opposed to the more colloquial use of the term. I believe Snape's emphasis on "me" in that sentence could be indicative of his desire to have DD validate his (Snape's) importance.< Betsy: Now this I can get a little more behind, because I do agree that Snape has a high opinion of Dumbledore, and wants to be validated by him. I don't think this means Snape is crazy. Actually, I think it's rather a sane way of thinking. (Of course, all I know of mental health I learned from Oprah and Dr. Drew, so take this as you will. *g*) Of all the people Snape could have picked as a father-figure, Dumbledore is probably one of the best. And if you consider that Snape more than likely placed first Lucius Malfoy and then Voldemort into that role, I would say Snape is actually improving himself. >>SSSusan: >In fact, while narcissistic!Snape may seem to be saying he's more complex than pissed, I like it precisely because in some ways it IS very simple -- it explains so *much* all in one package. His getting along w/ DD (who is empathetic and validates him)...< Betsy: So you think Snape fell in with Dumbledore, not for any moral reasons, but because Dumbledore fed his validation need better than Voldemort? Because, honestly, if Snape was this easily manipulated, I doubt Dumbledore would trust him so implicitly. I also think Voldemort (who strikes me as *very* good at using someone's psychological weaknesses against them) would have a tighter grip on Snape. >>SSSusan: >...his unwillingness to change even though Harry is important and NEEDS to learn...< Betsy: I've read your comments on this before. Basically you feel, if I have this right, that since Snape isn't reaching Harry with his current teaching methods, he should adopt a different method. A question I have is, how do we know Snape *isn't* succeeding in teaching Harry what he feels Harry needs to know? I still contend that Snape has done a *much* better job at teaching Harry Potions than he's been given credit for - and I think Harry's Potion OWL will bare this out. As to other lessons, since we're not sure what those lessons might be, it's hard to judge. Perhaps Snape has been put in charge of teaching Harry to stand up to sarcastic bastards. *eg* >>SSSusan: >...his outrage over the lost Order of Merlin...< Betsy: I've always thought Lupin was stretching the truth on this one, much as I distrust his "Snape was jealous of James' Quidditch skills" comment. Both ideas are so far out of whack with the Severus Snape we've met in the books that I think Lupin is making a sly dig in the first instance, and out and out covering up in the second. Lupin is a very deep character. He ain't just a sweet professor who loves chocolate. Though I agree that Snape was looking forward to receiving some type of acknowledgement of his accomplishments. I just think the Marauders getting away *again,* hit him harder than the loss of his Order of Merlin. >>SSSusan: >...his hateful treatment of Harry from the *start,*...< Betsy: I can agree on this one. At least, I think it could well be *one* of the reasons behind Snape's opening gambit with Harry. I think there is a certain feeling of rivalry Snape has towards Sirius and probably James. I can see a bit of Harry-as-James slipping in here. (Though I don't think that's all that was going on.) >>SSSusan: >...his nastiness to Hermione...< Betsy: I think that has more to do with Hermione being a cheat and an annoyance. She's interfered in his classroom *so* many times. I can't see a man as particular as Snape having any patience with those sort of antics. (I thought it was interesting that one of Harry's first experiences as a teacher for the DA was annoyance with Hermione. I think JKR was pointing something out there.) >>SSSusan: >In some ways, this label makes things *simpler* -- it certainly makes Snape more understandable in my eyes, anyway.< Betsy: I think I've got a clearer idea of what you mean by clinical narcissism, and I can see how it applies to Snape. I just don't want to take it to the extreme of "Snape got hit by the crazy-stick" because I don't think Snape is crazy. Actually, as we learn more about him and what all he's been through, I think Snape is amazingly sane. Betsy From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 05:56:57 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 05:56:57 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127342 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elady25" wrote: > > So, what sort of demise do you see in store for him, if any? a > sacrifice for Harry, being caught in an explosion, choking on a > chicken bone? > > Lots of folks think DD could die before the series is over, but I > haven't seen a lot of theories on how. > Tonks: Well this might not be the popular idea, but I think that DD is imortal. I know everyone, or most everyone, else thinks that he is just a man, but I think that he is more than that. I think that is the reason why his patronis is a phoenix and that Faulks is around. I think that he is like the phoenix. So if I think that out, I guess it means he dies at some point, but never really. He always comes back. So in that way DD can never die. After all in SS/PS he says that he will never be gone from Hogwarts as long as someone there needs him, or was it believes in him. Anyway I think that means that he can not die. When the final book is written, I will slink off in a corner somewhere if it turns out that I am wrong. Tonks_op From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sat Apr 9 06:03:47 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 06:03:47 -0000 Subject: Snape's ambitions (was Re: Narcissistic!Snape) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127343 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lealess" wrote: snip > So, it might not have anything to do with authority or self-esteem > issues, or even moral standards. It might just be the frustrations of > the job he probably didn't choose. > > Not that I personally agree with this view of rules, but I think I can > understand it. > > lealess imamommy: I had a thought recently: why does Snape continue to apply for the DADA position, when he's been turned down for fourteen years? Not why won't DD let him have it, but why does he keep going after it? I came to the conclusion that DD may have given Snape some shred of hope that, indeed, he might give him the job someday. If Snape was never going to get the post, wouldn't DD just tell him, "forget about it!"? So does that indicate that Snape has an understanding with DD that when the time is right, he will be able to teach DADA? Along with that, why does he want to? He seems to be an excellent potions maker; what does he feel he could do better in DADA? Surely it wouldn't improve his method of teaching. Also, I would imagine his knowledge of the subject would be quite extensive, but what does he feel he has to offer more than anyone else? Comments? imamommy From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 06:16:36 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 06:16:36 -0000 Subject: Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127344 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Emma Hawkes wrote: > > Money is one of the first things Harry Potter is introduced to in > the wizarding world. ... > > For example, ... the Weasleys meet ... the quidditch world cup, > ...edited... > > ...However, it is revealed that Arthur Weasley did not actually > have to buy his tickets - they were donated by the dodgy Ludo Bagman > (whose very name reeks of implied bribery). > bboyminn: Excellent ideas, very insightful. I'm just going to add a couple of minor points. Why would Bagman waste nearly half of the most premium and expensive seats in the World Cup Stadium on the Weasleys? It seems that even the Bulgarian Minister objected to all the seat being taken by the UK Ministry and demanded they add another row so his prestigious patrons could be seated in the top box[reading between the lines]. At a real-world football (American style), Soccer, or baseball stadium, these premium seat would indeed cost a fortune. So why didn't Bagman get Arthur standard routine common stadium seats? Certainly for free, Arthur would have been happy with that. Well, of course, the answer is Harry Potter. I'm sure Bagman intended to give Arthur common seats until he found out Harry was going to be there. Then both Bagman and Fudge saw a great public relations opportunity, never hurts a politician to be seen with the hero of the wizard world, especially when that hero is a poor sympathetic orphan. Seriously.... great P.R. So, it wasn't random chance, benevolence, or completely a returned favor that got Harry in the Top Box, it was a cold calculated political move, by some very self-serving politicians. Hummmm..... almost like the real-world (sarcasm). > Emma Hawkes continues: > > Arthur Weasley clearly participates in the exchange of favours but > appears to shun bribery and venal corruption. In this context, > the poverty of the Weasleys is perhaps the strongest indicator of > Arthur's ethics and commitment to the forces of good. ... > > Emma Hawkes bboyminn: Again, an excellent point, one that I had never thought of before, but one I completely agree with. Again, just filling in some miscellaneous info, I like to remind people that the Weasleys aren't as poor as Ron's whining might make them seem. They have spending money, a house and land, plenty of food to eat, and clothes to wear. They are working class. They have to manage their money well, they don't have spare cash for extravagances or luxuries, but they get by just fine. Note when Molly cleans out her bank vault of a few bits of silver and a single piece of gold, we don't know that that was all the money they had. First of all, that's not enough cash to buy everything they needed. So, in addition to what was in the vault, we can (or at least, I can) assume that Molly also had a small bag of gold that represented the most recent paycheck that Arthur brought home. The books don't say that, but it makes more sense than believing Molly bought everything she needed with a few pieces of silver and one gold Galleon. That probably doesn't even add up to $20. On your main point, I do agree, Arthur low income IS a strong indication that he is not corrupt. He is not above exchanging a few small favors or helping someone who deserves it, but shuns any real graft. So, in a sense, this was nothing but a nice long 'I agree' with a few extra details thrown in. Steve/bboyminn From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 06:27:51 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 06:27:51 -0000 Subject: Goblins/Flitwick and involvement in the OoTP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127345 >>Marcela: >I also wonder why Dumbledore has not used Flitwick as a liason speaker with the Goblins -at least it wasn't mentioned in OoTP...< Betsy: Maybe the Goblins have no truck with half-breeds. There's nothing saying Wizards have a corner on the prejudice market. Plus, Dumbledore has Bill Weasley working on the Goblin front, so it is being covered. >>Chys: >I was wondering why/if, is Flitwick in the Order at all? >If he's not in the order then he wouldn't be a good liason speaker, would he?< Betsy: IIRC the only members of the Hogwarts staff belonging to the Order are Snape, McGonagall, Hagrid, and of course, Dumbledore. (I'm not including various DADA professors, 'cause they come and go so darn quickly. *g*) Which of course would be an excellent reason to not use Flitwick as a liaison. I've long wondered if one of the staff won't suddenly turn traitor towards the end of the books, as Quirrill did. No canon or anything, just an idle thought. (It's also one of the reasons I think the obstacle course at the end of PS/SS was a trap to catch a DE rather than a learning experience for Harry. All the staff were involved in setting up the gauntlet, and Dumbledore obviously doesn't trust all the staff.) Betsy From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 06:31:33 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 06:31:33 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen Barker" wrote: > Karen: > > On a slight tangent it was mentioned that magic was 'bestowed' on > Harry by LV's AK on him as a baby. What about the possibility that > he was actually born a squib and *all* his magical ability came from > LV? Therefore once the connection between them was broken he was > left as a squib again etc etc > > Karen bboyminn: Before we run to far with this Harry is a Squib or a muggle idea, let's remember that on the day he was born the magic quill entered his name in the book of future students. That implies that Harry was born magical. He didn't meet Voldemort until he was about 15 months old. So the encounter with Voldemort only added /addition/ powers to Harry. The idea that Harry and/or Voldie lose their magic in the end is not a new idea, and there are several variations on it. One is that it will be an incidental outcome of the final confrontation. Another is that Harry will have to consciously choose some course of action knowing it means paying a very heavy price to defeat Voldemort. If Harry lost his power, while that would emotionally hurt, it wouldn't be the end of his access to the wizard world. Hermione's parents, with her help, are muggles who entered the wizard world. Certainly if Harry wanted in, all he would have to do is stand outside the Leaky Cauldron, and seeing him there, Tom-the Innkeeper would let him in. Also, muggle taxis traveled to the Burrow, if they can get there, then certainly Harry can get there. So, while it would be tragic, I don't think it would be as melodramatically tragic as some people make it out to be, and certainly wouldn't require 'memory charming' Harry to spare him the pain. Life is long, why numb a momentary pain only to lose a lifetime of friendship and love. Just doesn't seem necessary. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 10:31:57 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 10:31:57 -0000 Subject: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127347 Karen: That's [the Harry giving up magic idea] a really good answer and it's got me thinking alright. If Harry did sacrifice his magic, he'd have to go back to living as a muggle and would lose day-to-day contact with the WW, and Ron, Hermione etc (if still alive, which in this instance would be more moving if they were) would carry on being witches/wizards without him. Perhaps it would be kinder for someone to perform a memory altering charm so that Harry forgot all about everything. We would then come full circle. Harry would be famous in the WW, his name known to every man, woman and child and there probably really would be a 'Harry Potter Day' and Harry would once again be completely oblivious to the whole thing." Harry wouldn't have to give up his contact with the wizarding world. Muggles can be seen in Diagon Alley - Hermione's parents do it - and I'm guessing that once you've seen Diagon Alley you always see it. There's Squibs in wizard places, like Filch and Arabella Figg [we see her in the Ministry]. Harry would be more like them, not like a total Muggle. Harry's struggle after it was all over would be to find a purpose again, to not just step through the Veil as he seemed wont to do in the Ministry. The reaction to the end of all this would be terrible. Again, love for all his friends, perhaps most for one of them, would save him. That will all happen after book 7 ends, maybe. If I was in Harry's shoes, I wouldn't want to have my memories obliterated. Karen: "On a slight tangent it was mentioned that magic was 'bestowed' on Harry by LV's AK on him as a baby. What about the possibility that he was actually born a squib and *all* his magical ability came from LV? Therefore once the connection between them was broken he was left as a squib again etc etc" Sure it's possible, but there's no way to ever know now. As the son of a powerful witch and wizard, the odds were in Harry's favor, but there's no way to tell. Jim Ferer From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 11:25:39 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 04:25:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050409112539.17567.qmail@web53906.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127348 Jen wrote: People extrapolate from the Pensieve incident in the fifth year that James and Sirius (especially) are bullies, and that they have spent most of their time at Hogwarts hounding Snape. If that's the case, and Snape not only hates James & Sirius, but he is also a victim of their bullying, it ups the ante even more--what in the world compelled him to go to the Whomping Willow that night? Lynn: I've been following this thread and I'm having trouble understanding the poor, poor, pitiful Snape or the bullied/victim Snape scenario. We are seeing Snape's memory in the Pensieve which is filtered through Snape's emotions and prejudices. I have found with memories that there is my memory, their memory and what actually happened. Sirius answering quickly and Lupin's sideways glance spoke to me that there was other information that wasn't being shared at that time. Sirius said he was bored and that he wished it was a full moon, not that he was bored and wished James would go around hexing someone or Snape in particular. To me that means that Sirius was craving adventure, not wanting to bully someone. We know that Sirius has stated that Snape was always spying on them trying to get them in trouble or expelled - much the same way Draco did/does to Harry. It may be that when James saw Snape he knew that Snape was again spying. After all, it doesn't make sense to me that, if he was being victimized, Snape made sure to stay close enough to James to overhear his whole conversation while supposedly being totally absorbed in his exam. Harry was between Snape and James and had to strain his ears to hear after the exam while Snape seems to have been able to hear which speaks of trying to hear through all the noise, not of being absorbed in the test paper. Also, if Snape was such a victim, wouldn't he have made sure he didn't sit so close to James? Again, I don't buy the deeply absorbed in the test paper explanation. Was James a bully? When Harry asks why Lily dated James, he was told that after James' head deflated a bit, he stopped hexing people just for fun. Harry asked about Snape and the answer was that Snape was an exception as Snape never lost an opportunity to curse James and James couldn't take that lying down. Who started it? As James and Snape hated each other on sight, much the same way as Harry and Draco, a case could be made that Snape was as much of an aggressor as James if Snape is cast in the Draco role. After all, how would people know that Snape was heavy into the Dark Arts and knew more hexes and curses than 7th year students unless he had done something to prove that? In the pensieve, Lily stated that James is as bad as Snape. Obviously Snape has a bad reputation which is further enforced by the information that Snape was clearly unpopular. And, while James washed Snape's mouth out with soap, after a bunch of cursing, Snape's retaliation drew blood. It seems to me that Snape could take care of himself quite well and was well versed in how to hurt people. Besides, I find it interesting that his first impluse upon hearing James speak to him was to go for his wand. He wasn't scared or intimidated by James at all. Now, a case could be made that Snape only remembers it that way because it is a salve to his ego. However, if we accept that theory then we have to also admit that all the rest of the memory is just as colourfully tainted. As an aside, this memory paints an interesting portrait of Wormtail as well. Jen wrote: I'm left believing simple curiousity is primarily what led Snape to the Willow that night, along with hoping to get the Marauders in trouble as a delicious just dessert. The gauntlet was thrown by Sirius, and Snape couldn't leave it and walk away. And 20 years later his agenda hasn't changed remarkably, has it? Lynn: I disagree that it was simple curiousity. I believe that it was the thought of getting something on the Marauders which he could use in the future which motivated Snape. He had to have seen Madam Pomfrey take Lupin there so he must have known it was sanctioned by Dumbledore. However, as it was under the cover of night, he had to realize that it was something Dumbledore was trying to keep hidden. It would have given Snape power over the Marauders if he knew the secret. After all, how much would they have sacrificed for Lupin? It also fits in with the group Snape hung with - they all became Deatheaters. They were after power. That the power came with the added benefit of being able to humiliate your enemy could have made the temptation to know the secret too much to resist. I can see the scenario where Sirius caught Snape spying on Lupin and Madam Pomfrey and throwing out the remark of how to get to the passageway on impulse due to his irritation at the spying. I don't believe he intended to kill Snape. If that was his intention, he wouldn't have told anyone what he did. The fact that James had the time to get Snape out of harms way implies that Sirius encountered James soon after and still hadn't thought through the consequences of his actions. JMHO, Lynn --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Sat Apr 9 16:11:05 2005 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 12:11:05 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050409121154.SM00760@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 127349 > > elady25: > > > > Lots of folks think DD could die before the series is over, but I > > haven't seen a lot of theories on how. > > > > Tonks: > Well this might not be the popular idea, but I think that DD > is imortal. I know everyone, or most everyone, else thinks > that he is just a man, but I think that he is more than that. > I think that is the reason why his patronis is a phoenix and > that Faulks is around. > I think that he is like the phoenix. So if I think that out, > I guess it means he dies at some point, but never really. He > always comes back. So in that way DD can never die. After all > in SS/PS he says that he will never be gone from Hogwarts as > long as someone there needs him, or was it believes in him. > Anyway I think that means that he can not die. When the final > book is written, I will slink off in a corner somewhere if it > turns out that I am wrong. Vivamus: Oooh! Brain-flash! How about this for a concept: DD embodies the spirit of Godric Gryffindor, and LV embodies the spirit of Salazar Slytherin. When the two "best ever" friends were divided and the rift between their houses followed, something happened that caused them to not be able to find their rest, but wrestle with each other through the centuries. If the houses are ever reconciled to each other and the friendship of GG and SS restored, both spirits will be able to go on and be at rest, no longer imbuing their avatars with power. DD represents (or even is) the current avatar of GG, and LV of SS. Harry, however, is somehow the recipient of BOTH spirits, through his parents in some way that has been hinted at but never yet revealed, and through LV in the curse that failed. That would be why the serpent was "in essence divided" when DD queried it -- the spirit of SS was in both Harry and LV. (That part comes from, I think, Mooseming.) Ironic that we have assumed it to mean the spirit of LV which was split between his new body and Harry's, but it works just as well when you think of it this way. The spirit of GG, embodied not in Harry but in DD, represents the uncompleted desires of GG. We don't yet know the connection between DD, GG, and Harry, but there have been MANY hints of it, from the beginning of the series. If the spirit of GG is in fact resident in DD (and partly in Harry), and the spirit of SS resides in LV (and partly in Harry), then we have a very nice symmetry, with a perfect problem to be resolved. Unfortunately, if that is the case, I don't see any way it can be resolved without the death of DD, if LV is vanquished. If that's the case, then the resolution won't happen unless both spirits go away. We could see DD and LV both die in the last book, finally achieving balance and resolution between GG and SS. As a result, the powers that were in DD and LV go away, with most of Harry's powers going away as well. Harry's scar might go away at the same time. (The scar disappearing at the end was suggested in one of the groups at least five years ago, I think, but I don't remember by whom.) Perhaps a bit far-fetched, but perfectly possible, don't you think? Vivamus From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 17:10:49 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 10:10:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Opinions (was Harry's Motivation) (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050409171049.49270.qmail@web53905.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127350 Alla wrote: Hm, we have to disagree sometimes, right? My approach is the same as Potioncat, I think. But I am very very curious to understand yours. Not being sarcastic Alla Lynn: I'm more like Lupinlore so here is my take on it. I invest emotionally and if I'm not satisfied emotionally then I feel as if I lost my economic investment. It's one reason I don't go to the theatre to see movies much anymore. I hate spending all that money to come out feeling disappointed. Does that mean it has to end the way I want it too? No but it has to end in a way that satisfies me emotionally. For example, I hated the ending of Sommersby when the Richard Gere character died as I felt they both deserved to have happy life. That seemed to me to be a senseless death and there should have been a different ending. However, with Matrix, even though I would have loved to see the Keanu Reeves character live happily ever after, the ending, while not what I wanted, still made sense and was even welcome after his love interest died. I will not buy books by authors I don't know. I will borrow a book or two by them first to see if they are the type of writers where I want to invest emotionally in the characters. If not, I won't buy their books. If they are, I will buy their books the minute a new one comes out. At the same time, if one of those authors disappoints more than once (let's face it, everyone can have a bad time), they come off my must buy list and I'll read it at the library until I determine it is a book I want to keep and then I'll go out and buy the paperback. Obviously, with the HP series, I've had to invest economically even though I don't know if the ending will disappoint. But, like Lupinlore, if the ending does not satisfy, any future books by JK Rowlings won't be bought until I'm satisfied it's an ending that doesn't disappoint. So far, I'm satisfied with what I've invested economically on the books. Then again, I got the first 4 at a used book shop in Den Haag so I really didn't invest all that much. My real investment would be in books 5-7. That said, if I had read books 1 and 2 first, I would not have/be invested/ing in books 3-7 as I didn't find them particularly satisfying. Fortunately, I read books 3 and 4 first (those were the first two the second hand shop had available) and it was because of back reference from those books that books 1 and 2 were worth the investment. By then, I was emotionally invested enough to accept the deficiencies of the first two books. Bearing in mind that these are children's books, I'm reading them with an eye to whether I want to invest my time reading these books with my daughter. Fortunately, she's only 5 so while she's seen the movies and I've read her Book 1, she won't realize until she's older that there are more stories out there. By that time, I will either have introduced her to the rest of the series (if the ending is acceptable) or she'll learn about them by herself and decide for herself if she wishes to invest in the series. I do agree with Jo that ultimately she must please herself with her writing. At the same time, I have the option of either accepting what she writes by buying her books or rejecting it by spending my money on something I deem more worthy. Hope that didn't make things clear as mud. Lynn test'; "> __________________________________________________ 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 stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Apr 9 17:28:55 2005 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 17:28:55 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <20050409112539.17567.qmail@web53906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127351 Lynn: I've been following this thread and I'm having trouble understanding the poor, poor, pitiful Snape or the bullied/victim Snape scenario. We are seeing Snape's memory in the Pensieve which is filtered through Snape's emotions and prejudices. I have found with memories that there is my memory, their memory and what actually happened. Sirius answering quickly and Lupin's sideways glance spoke to me that there was other information that wasn't being shared at that time. Jen: How to interpret that scene hinges on a reader's perception of the Pensieve. I tend to see the Pensieve like you do Lynn, as a means to view personal, i.e., subjective memories, with all the attached emotions, misperceptions, etc., a character brings into experiences. Others make a pretty good case for the Pensieve acting as an objective viewing of a memory, taking into account everyone present and reflecting the scene pretty much how it happened in real life. Whether the memory is subjective or objective though, I do perceive some elements of bullying in that scene. Two-on-one, public humiliation....not exactly James' and Sirius' finest moment. *But*, and this is a big but, I don't for a minute believe the tables weren't turned on other occasions or that the one scene indicates a pattern of bullying on the part of James/Sirius. There was a reason they all hated each other so passionately, and I can't believe James' explanation for attacking Snape "because he exists" was the final word on the matter. That sounded more like an attempt to impress Lily and pander to the crowd than an explanation. What's he going to say? "Wah, Snape is mean to me all the time; just the other day he..." blah, blah blah. Better the nonchalant answer implying James has the power. Lynn: Also, if Snape was such a victim, wouldn't he have made sure he didn't sit so close to James? Again, I don't buy the deeply absorbed in the test paper explanation. Jen: This is another example why I can't believe there was a *pattern* of bullying on the part of James and Sirius. A victimized person is very sensitive to the routines and actions of an attacker. He wouldn't willingly go anywhere near the vicinity of James and Sirius, and in fact would be extremely careful to avoid them. In that moment, Snape is either truly unaware J & S are around, implying he's not overly sensitive to their prescence, or some part of him feels up to the challenge. > Bookworm: > Doesn't this sound a bit like another young wizard we know?? > Tendency toward rescuing people, acting before thinking things > through... Could it be they {Snape & Harry} are much more alike > than either would like to think about? Jen: I totally agree ;). From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Apr 9 18:24:56 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 18:24:56 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127352 Betsy said: > I don't think this means Snape is crazy. > I just don't want to take it to the extreme of "Snape got hit by > the crazy-stick" because I don't think Snape is crazy. > Of all the people Snape could have picked as a father-figure, > Dumbledore is probably one of the best. And if you consider that > Snape more than likely placed first Lucius Malfoy and then > Voldemort into that role, I would say Snape is actually improving > himself. SSSusan: Apparently I'm not expressing myself as clearly as I hoped I was. First off, I never said ? nor would I ever say ? that a narcissist is "crazy." Narcissism is a personality disorder [NPD]; it has nothing to do with being "crazy." Narcissists are not typically psychopaths, nor do they typically have psychotic breaks. I did not say nor do I think Snape is "crazy." I'm also not sure where the notion came from that a narcissist in general, or Snape in particular, is seeking a father figure. If I could refer you back to my original post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127184 , I think you'll find that neither in that 4-paragraph excerpt I included, nor in my own words, did I ever say Snape is looking for father figures. What I did say is that a narcissist craves external validation. He craves positive feedback, positive attention, validation of himself. This does not have to be a father figure. As Mara pointed out, for someone like Lockhart, he seems to crave this from *everyone,* but for someone like Snape, it may be particular individuals from whom he craves this. Some narcissists crave attention for their looks; others for their intellect or achievements. In neither instance is it a situation of wanting a father figure. Another key point is that narcissists are also not necessarily low- functioning, as there is a *range* of impairment involved. So, on the contrary, many narcissists get along quite nicely day to day, perhaps not in all aspects of their lives, but also perhaps in many. I work with a woman who meets about 80% of the NPD qualifications, and she is intelligent, extremely talented, accomplished in some significant ways. So I would never say Snape isn't intelligent, talented, and in many ways high-functioning. The areas where we see *problems* for him, however, tend to match up well with key characteristics of those with NPD. Some further info, which may be of interest. My comments can be found within [ ]. >From http://www.ptypes.com/narcissisticpd.html : The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (American Psychiatric Association, 1994, pg. 661) describes Narcissistic Personality Disorder as a pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following: *has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements); *is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love; *believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high- status people (or institutions); *requires excessive admiration; *has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations; *is interpersonally exploitive, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends; *lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others; *is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her; *shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes. [Does Snape fit all of these categories? Certainly not. Does he fit several? I believe so.] Fears/ Distresses *being scorned *being seen as common *being ordinary *being seen as inferior *failure *others not according them admiration and respect >From http://www.bullyonline.org/workbully/npd.htm : People with narcissistic personality disorder also have difficulty recognizing the needs and feelings of others, and are dismissive, contemptuous and impatient when others share or discuss their concerns or problems. They are also oblivious to the hurtfulness of their behaviour or remarks, show an emotional coldness and a lack of reciprocal interest, exhibit envy (especially when others are accorded recognition), have an arrogant, disdainful and patronizing attitude, and are quick to blame and criticise others when their needs and expectations are not met. [A *lot* pops out at me here in terms of Snape's intereactions with his students, but "exhibit envy (especially when others are accorded recognition)" seems to fit particularly well with Harry. Harry felt blindsided, I think, that first day of Potions class. Argue any way you like, but Snape's assumptions about Harry & his behavior seemed way out of line in that scene to many readers, and I think this fits well with how a narcissist would "react" (or "act," I think more accurately) in the situation of being confronted with that KID who THINKS he's so SPECIAL.] Consider also http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html : *Characterized by aloofness and avoidance of intimacy *Are very reluctant to open up and trust *Narcissists' self-reports are unreliable [We have no evidence of this at this time, but IF Snape exaggerated the danger he was in during the prank, it would make DD's response of "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus" a little more understandable, no?] *Narcissists cultivate solipsistic or "autistic" fantasies, which is to say that they live in their own little worlds (and react with affront when reality dares to intrude). Narcissists think that everyone who is not special and superior is worthless. By definition, normal, ordinary, and average aren't special and superior, and so, to narcissists, they are worthless. *Require excessive admiration -- excessive in two ways: they want praise, compliments, deference, and expressions of envy all the time, and they want to be told that everything they do is better than what others can do. [Potions *master,* anyone?] *In clinical terms, empathy is the ability to recognize and interpret other people's emotions. Lack of empathy may take two different directions: (a) accurate interpretation of others' emotions with no concern for others' distress, which is characteristic of psychopaths; and (b) the inability to recognize and accurately interpret other people's emotions, which is the NPD style. [Hermione's teeth and "I see no difference," anyone? You don't have to think he was deliberately choosing to show no concern, if you don't like; it can be a matter of his inability to accurately interpret how upset Hermione was.] Betsy: > A question I have is, how do we know Snape *isn't* succeeding in > teaching Harry what he feels Harry needs to know? I still contend > that Snape has done a *much* better job at teaching Harry Potions > than he's been given credit for - and I think Harry's Potion OWL > will bare this out. As to other lessons, since we're not sure what > those lessons might be, it's hard to judge. SSSusan: I *so* don't want this to turn into yet another Snape's a good teacher/Snape's a bad teacher discussion :-), but I will try to briefly make a couple of points here. 1) The former teacher in me blanches a bit at this. I, too, think Harry did better on his OWL than he/we would have expected. BUT there is an important difference for me between a) doing better than people will have thought and *in spite of* the teacher and b) a student reaching his most full potential; 2) Other lessons/information: occlumency, things he might need to know about Voldy, ways of defending himself ? things Snape may well be privy to from his time as a DE. As I've said before, in ordinary times with an ordinary kid, I'd be more inclined to say, "Yeah, well" about Snape. But with the future of the Wizarding World at stake and Prophecy Boy as the subject of the discussion, it *matters* that you make the distinction between "learning well enough in spite of the teacher" and "achieving his full potential." So seeing Snape as a narcissist helps me understand *why* he might not be able to bring himself to change for Harry or even for The Cause. >>SSSusan: >...his outrage over the lost Order of Merlin...< Betsy: > I've always thought Lupin was stretching the truth on this one > [The] idea [is] so far out of whack with the Severus Snape we've > met in the books that I think Lupin is making a sly dig.... SSSusan: But we SEE the behavior for ourselves. Snape screams, he shrieks, he howls, we see the spit flying from his mouth! We hear Fudge characterize Snape afterwards as unbalanced. It's not Lupin we're relying upon for this. And my point is really that this SEEMS out of character because Snape is going ballistic over a perceived slight or a disappointment. That's what narcissists do! See points above about narcissists having a sense of entitlement and of craving admiration, AND the fact that they may "react with hurt or rage when these expectations are frustrated" ( http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html ). Remember, he may be able to function well, to keep some of the "worst of it" from showing much of the time, but when faced with the huge disappointment, he can't help himself. If I'm wrong, and Snape's actually reacting to Sirius' escape more than the loss of the OoM, fine; but what I've presented is also one way of reading it and getting to the behavior we see demonstrated by Snape. Again, I'm not saying anyone else has to buy into this model. *I* find it makes sense of some behaviors of Snape's that I *couldn't* make sense of before I considered it. OTOH, I think one has to give the definitions/characteristics of NPD a real look before considering it bunk, rather than just thinking "narcissism = crazy" or "narcissism = extreme vanity." It's more complex than that. One has to get away from the notion that a narcissist is STURDY individual with a healthy, positive ego. There *is* an inflated ego presented to the world, and an arrogance. But it's an overcompensating, it's a masking a self- image which, while positive, is FRAGILELY so. In my mind anyway, the NPD reading makes for a more understandable -- simpler, if you will, in the end -- reading of the character of Snape. Siriusly Snapey Susan From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 19:45:12 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 12:45:12 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050409194512.5385.qmail@web53909.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127353 Emma wrote: However, it is revealed that Arthur Weasley did not actually have to buy his tickets - they were donated by the dodgy Ludo Bagman (whose very name reeks of implied bribery). 'I like Ludo... He was the one who got us such good tickets for the Cup. I did him a bit of a favour: his brother, Otto, got into a spot of trouble - a lawnmower with unnatural powers - I smoothed the whole thing over.'3 Small gifts and favours of this sort seem to be constantly traded among wizards. In The Prisoner of Azkaban Arthur borrows a car from work. In The Goblet of Fire a friend of his attaches the Dursley's fireplace to the floo network as a favour. Arthur says, 'I've got a useful contact at the Floor Regulation Panel and he fixed it for me.'4 This suggests, disturbingly, a culture of daily, petty corruption in the Ministry of Magic. This presents the possibility of further, more sinister, corruption. Lynn: I disagree with some of the assumptions and conclusions from this post. First, the assumption that the World Cup tickets were 'donated'. Canon does not say that, what is says is "He was the one who got us such good tickets for the Cup." It could mean that Bagman paid for them or it could mean that Bagman "upgraded" the tickets. It may also be that these were some of the "freebie" tickets available to VIPs. At basketball games the guys are each given some tickets to give to friends and relatives and frequently trade with each other when extra people are in town. After all, the Malfoys didn't pay for their seats either. Perhaps their seats were Fudge's freebies while Bagman was able to round up some others for the Weasleys? Just because the Bulgarian Minister wanted another ten seats doesn't mean that he was short of seats, just that he wanted more. The players came down the middle aisle so we don't know who was on the other side of the aisle. Second, I believe it is a stretch to say that Arthur Weasley borrowed the ministry cars in POA. He might have borrowed one, but 2? With chauffers? No way. That was the Ministry's doing just as I bet the Ministry paid for the Weasleys to stay at the Leaky Cauldron that night. It was to protect Harry and how better to protect him without his knowing than have the Weasleys show up and then have Arthur "borrow" a couple of cars. After all, the following year, when Harry was no longer deemed to be in danger, Arthur couldn't "borrow" cars anymore. Why quibble? While I agree that there is evidence of corruption/bribery/graft in the WW, I think it is wrong to associate favours one does for friends and colleagues as bribery, graft or corruption. It must be the sorry person who has never done a favour for a friend. If it is in one's power to grant a wish, do a favour, help out a bit, then why is that wrong, so long as there is no ulterior motive? Arthur didn't go to help Moody because he expected something in return, he did it to help someone. I'm sure he didn't help Ludo's brother with the thought that down the line Ludo would be buying expensive tickets for the whole family to the World Cup. Rather, he was helping out a friend. Seems to me, if he was looking for a tit for tat then he could have called in some favours when it came to light that the Ford Anglia had been bewitched. These types of favours aren't petty corruption, they are daily life in every day society. It's called helping each other out to get through life. Donating money to buy influence? Now that's corruption. Doing things you wouldn't normally do simply to get something? That's corruption. Doing something to help someone with no expectation of a return of any kind? That's the kind of person I like to know. Lynn test'; "> --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 20:13:17 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 20:13:17 -0000 Subject: Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > Again, just filling in some miscellaneous info, I like to remind > people that the Weasleys aren't as poor as Ron's whining might make > them seem. They have spending money, a house and land, plenty of food > to eat, and clothes to wear. They are working class. They have to > manage their money well, they don't have spare cash for extravagances > or luxuries, but they get by just fine. > a_svirn: The Weasleys are NOT working class. They may be impoverished but they evidently come from the old and respected stock or they wouldn't meet on the same family tree with Blacks. And as far as we can see in the WW being well-connected is more important than just being plain wealthy. Goblins after all have little or no political influence. (Of course it never hurt being both wealthy AND well- connected). Arthur and Percy both work for the Ministry and Malfoy's insinuations notwithstanding Arthur is a head of the Department. Even if the most of his colleagues regard his post as a sinecure it is still a prestigious position. Moreover, I am not at all sure that his post is such an insignificant one as Malfoy would have us believed. After all Arthur had enough influence to present the Muggle Protection Act that, had his motion passed, would have cause no little embarrassment to Malfoy and Co. And it could well have passed had not Harry and Ron so obligingly driven that Ford Anglia creating just the kind of scandal for Malfoy to have tables tuned. Moreover, Arthur is very well-liked. He is on the first name basis with the most influential figures in the ministry. Even the formidable Crouch Sr. who couldn't bring himself to remember or notice his personal assistant, despised Bagman and ignored Amos Diggory plainly held Arthur in esteem. And in CoS the governors asked DD to resume his post upon being told that Arthur Weasly's daughter had been killed. They might have given to Malfoy threats at first (and who cares about these muggle-bornes anyway), but as soon as one of their own was affected they came to their senses. And Arthur is plainly one of them. One of the elite that is, even if he is not at all affluent. Otherwise Malfoy wouldn't consider him his rival which he certainly does. As for giving the Weasleys seats in the top-box because of Harry, I think it was certainly an incentive, but had Harry's best friend happened to be Seamus he wouldn't have ended up in the top-box. Arthur's own position in the Ministry and his friendly relationship with Bagman made this PR decision look perfectly natural however. What I do not understand though, is why did Molly stay at home? a_svirn From ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com Sat Apr 9 20:33:42 2005 From: ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com (Constance Vigilance) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 20:33:42 -0000 Subject: FILK: Still Call the Dursleys' Home Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127355 With a wave to our members from Oz, I propose this one to the tune of "I Still Call Australia Home" by Peter Allen. This is a rather sappy rendition of the song, but that's what was available. You might have to cut and paste the URL: http://www.midipapa.de/MIDIs/MONeill/I_Still_Call_Australia_Home_- Peter_Allen.mid Sung by Dumbledore to Harry, in explanation of why Harry must continue to return to the Dursleys' at least occasionally. You Still Call The Dursleys' Home Because of your mother's supreme sacrifice, 'Twas tempered by an ancient magic device, In safety you travel whereever you roam While you still call the Dursleys' home. Ferry your footsteps and follow a star The blood charm will keep you no matter how far Lay your head where you will near your broomstick and comb But still call the Dursleys' home. Though evil will seek you and terror will try To capture and tear you apart A powerful will, but much tougher still Is the love in a mother's pure heart. Loathsome it may be to keep going back Abide where you will, whether mansion or shack. Seek the horizon by thestral or brougham But still call the Dursleys' home Old magic created a powerful charm Your mother's blood blessed it to keep you from harm As long as no matter whereever you roam You still call the Dursleys' - still call the Dursleys', still call the Dursleys' - home. ~CV, g'night mate ... From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 21:30:54 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 21:30:54 -0000 Subject: Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127356 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > ...the Weasleys ... have spending money, a house and land, plenty > > of food to eat, and clothes to wear. They are working class. ... > > they get by just fine. > > > > a_svirn: > > The Weasleys are NOT working class. They may be impoverished but > they evidently come from the old and respected stock or they > wouldn't meet on the same family tree with Blacks. And as far as we > can see in the WW being well-connected is more important than just > being plain wealthy. > > ...edited... > > a_svirn bboyminn: Well, we are talking apples and oranges here. As a side note, I agree with all your 'oranges' and don't see them at all conflicting with my 'apples' You are addressing the Weasley's social class, were as I am addressing their financial status. They have a lifestyle consistent with many of the working class stiffs I grew up with. I come from a small town rural working class area of the country where factory work is the primary occupation. People are well able to provide for the basic needs of life, food, shelter, clothing, transportion and the education of their families, but at the same time, extravagances and luxuries like fancy designer clothes and large well decorated houses in prime neighborhoods are out. >From a social perspective, I do agree with everything you said, can't find a point to dispute, but from an economic perspective, I stand firmly by everything I said. Regarding the World Cup, it's true Arthur's connections and the fact that he is generally well liked and respected did help get him tickets, but to get premium Top Box tickets, which in the muggle world are probably worth more than a years salary to most people, was because of Harry. These Top Box seats are not for general guests, they are for VIP's, honored guests, and visiting dignitaries; certainly not for working guys with their large pack of kids and friends. For Arthur to get such Premium seats on his own would mean that Bagman owed Arthur an EXTREMELY large debt. But if we factor Harry into the equation, then both Bagman and the Minister have reason to allow Harry and friends into the Top Box. Certainly, there we other good quality seats that Bagman could have given, seats that weren't worth a kings ransom. So, just as the borrowed Ministry cars were because of Harry, just like the Weasley's stay at the Leaky Cauldron was because of Harry though courtesy of the Ministry. Just like the Weasleys manage to pay for three extremely expensive taxis to London, again, I believe courtesy of the Ministry. Just like Minister Fudge himself intercepted Harry at the Leaky Cauldron rather than some junior underling, was because Harry is Harry, and the Ministry knows that past, present, and future, Harry is valuable to the Wizard World. They may not know all the details, but that much they do know, and that much they value. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 07:21:32 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 07:21:32 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127357 > Tonks: > Well this might not be the popular idea, but I think that DD is > imortal. I know everyone, or most everyone, else thinks that he is > just a man, but I think that he is more than that. I think that is > the reason why his patronis is a phoenix and that Faulks is around. > I think that he is like the phoenix. So if I think that out, I guess > it means he dies at some point, but never really. He always comes > back. So in that way DD can never die. After all in SS/PS he says > that he will never be gone from Hogwarts as long as someone there > needs him, or was it believes in him. Anyway I think that means that > he can not die. When the final book is written, I will slink off in > a corner somewhere if it turns out that I am wrong. > > Tonks_op I think it's more that the IDEA of him (The champion/helper whatever) cannot die, and that in that respect, he's like the phoenix. That could spur others onward, like how Harry had thought of DD and that it was encouraging like the Phoenix song was uplifting. Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 07:19:15 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 07:19:15 -0000 Subject: Goblins/Flitwick and involvement in the OoTP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127358 > Betsy: > Maybe the Goblins have no truck with half-breeds. There's nothing > saying Wizards have a corner on the prejudice market. Plus, > Dumbledore has Bill Weasley working on the Goblin front, so it is > being covered. > Chys: I totally forgot about that. I do think Goblins are more prejudiced, they seem more haughty that others, aside from the centaurs. At least they are willing to deal with wizards as if they are equals. Betsy: I've long wondered if one of the staff won't suddenly turn traitor > towards the end of the books, as Quirrill did. No canon or > anything, just an idle thought. > (It's also one of the reasons I think the obstacle course at the end > of PS/SS was a trap to catch a DE rather than a learning experience > for Harry. All the staff were involved in setting up the gauntlet, > and Dumbledore obviously doesn't trust all the staff.) > > Chys: Filch anyone? Well- Vector, Binns.... I don't think they were involved with the tasks. Maybe just the main featured people on the staff being involved with it. Still, I was wondering why Harry is so against trusting Flitwick to even try to contact Dumbledore for him? (or something of that nature) Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 07:36:57 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 07:36:57 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127359 > Antosha: > Too, there's the question of why you put an ancient wizard in a series of stories starring a > young hero. What else is he going to do but pass away? Fine, you can have him around to > swoop in after the heroic act is complete, as Gandalf saves Frodo after the Ring has been > destroyed. But even Gandalf died, if only to be reborn. Same with Obi Wan. Or Merlin. > Same with thousands of other wise men and women in thousands of myths, folktales and > novels. None of them are there at the last crisis. > > Mind, I'm not sure that both Hagrid and DD don't die. I'd just be surprised if they both > cash it in at the end of HBP--that's where I expect Dumbledore to take his final bow. Chys: Wouldn't it be amusing if they were all alive and well at the end, sort of break the chain of predictability there. I've heard that this story is related to The lord of the rings and Star Wars and such, but why can't it stand on it's own, for the major plot devices? (Especially since it's BEING written now... I don't think it's going to follow what everyone expects of an epic like this. I think we're in for some good surprises.) Chys From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 22:42:57 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 22:42:57 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127360 > Betsy said: I don't think this means Snape is crazy. I just don't want to take it to the extreme of "Snape got hit by the crazy-stick" because I don't think Snape is crazy. SSSusan: Apparently I'm not expressing myself as clearly as I hoped I was. First off, I never said ? nor would I ever say ? that a narcissist is "crazy." Narcissism is a personality disorder [NPD]; it has nothing to do with being "crazy." Narcissists are not typically psychopaths, nor do they typically have psychotic breaks. I did not say nor do I think Snape is "crazy." Alla: I don't think I have said it here yet, but consider me firmly on board untill further notice, please. ;o) I also don't remember you ever calling Snape crazy. :) Susan: What I did say is that a narcissist craves external validation. He craves positive feedback, positive attention, validation of himself. This does not have to be a father figure. As Mara pointed out, for someone like Lockhart, he seems to crave this from *everyone,* but for someone like Snape, it may be particular individuals from whom he craves this. Some narcissists crave attention for their looks; others for their intellect or achievements. In neither instance is it a situation of wanting a father figure. Alla: Absolutely. I don't think for example that Snape would like to have Harry as father figure. :-) "Like father, like son, Potter! I have just saved your neck; you should be thanking me on bended kneee" - PoA, p.361, paperback. Now before Betsy or anyone else will argue that Snape indeed sincerely believes that he is saving Harry's neck, the way I understand Susan's point - it does not matter whether he sincerely believes it or not. That is just his personality trait, no matter what circumstances are. Alla, who mercilesly snipped the rest of Susan's post, because she loved it so much and had nothing to add From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 01:09:49 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 01:09:49 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127362 >>SSSusan: >Apparently I'm not expressing myself as clearly as I hoped I was. First off, I never said ? nor would I ever say ? that a narcissist is "crazy." Narcissism is a personality disorder [NPD]; it has nothing to do with being "crazy." Narcissists are not typically psychopaths, nor do they typically have psychotic breaks. I did not say nor do I think Snape is "crazy."< Betsy: I wasn't responding to you, SSSusan, more trying to head off other folks who might take this idea and run with it. Though a personality disorder does suggest a certain amount of instability. A person is held hostage, to a certain extent, by their disease, and anything in their environment that might trigger a reaction. (That's my understanding, at least.) I think Snape has more control than that. >>SSSusan: >I'm also not sure where the notion came from that a narcissist in general, or Snape in particular, is seeking a father figure.< Betsy: I'm the one who raised that idea, I think. Though I didn't link it to NPD (or didn't mean to, anyway). It was the one way I could agree that Snape does seek a certain amount of validation. However, if that negates the NPD theory then I'm less inclined to agree with that particular diagnosis, because I do think Snape does look to Dumbledore as a type of father figure. I think Snape, with his not so great homelife, had been looking for a father figure when he fell in with Lucius Malfoy, and later on with Voldemort. The fact that he was able to pull away from both men and turn towards Dumbledore suggests a certain sense of healthy self-worth I'm not sure Snape would have if he had such an unhealthy craving for validation. >>SSSusan: >What I did say is that a narcissist craves external validation. He craves positive feedback, positive attention, validation of himself. This does not have to be a father figure. As Mara pointed out, for someone like Lockhart, he seems to crave this from *everyone,* but for someone like Snape, it may be particular individuals from whom he craves this.< Betsy: But, again, if Snape was this emotionally needy I'm not sure how he'd have ever escaped Voldemort's clutches. Voldemort is an *expert* at mental manipulation, and I'm sure he wouldn't have missed Snape's vulnerability. Neither would Dumbledore, for that matter. And, again, if Snape was this open to manipulation, I don't think Dumbledore would have put so much trust in Snape. (A trust Snape still holds at the close of OotP.) >>SSSusan: >[A *lot* pops out at me here in terms of Snape's intereactions with his students, but "exhibit envy (especially when others are accorded recognition)" seems to fit particularly well with Harry. Harry felt blindsided, I think, that first day of Potions class. Argue any way you like, but Snape's assumptions about Harry & his behavior seemed way out of line in that scene to many readers, and I think this fits well with how a narcissist would "react" (or "act," I think more accurately) in the situation of being confronted with that KID who THINKS he's so SPECIAL.]< Betsy: Or the reaction of Snape when confronted with a kid who closely resembles the boy who sexually humiliated him and then nearly killed him. Or confronted with a kid that showing an iota of friendliness to would out his role as spy on the DEs. We the readers are fully aware of how much Harry hates the spotlight. Snape is not. And, frankly, after seeing James as a boy it's apparent why Snape made the assumptions he did. If there was no personal history between Snape and Harry's father, I could see the NPD argument, but there's so *much* history between them I don't think Snape's various motivations can be so easily swept aside. >>SSSusan: >Consider also http://www.halcyon.com/jmashmun/npd/dsm-iv.html : >*Characterized by aloofness and avoidance of intimacy >*Are very reluctant to open up and trust >*Narcissists' self-reports are unreliable >[We have no evidence of this at this time, but IF Snape exaggerated the danger he was in during the prank, it would make DD's response of "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus" a little more understandable, no?]< Betsy: Of course that would also negate the whole "life-debt" thing. And James would loose some of his "hero" points, yes? Plus, a certain amount of aloofness and lack of trust is fairly typical of a spy in a cold war situation. >>SSSusan: >*Require excessive admiration -- excessive in two ways: they want praise, compliments, deference, and expressions of envy all the time, and they want to be told that everything they do is better than what others can do. >[Potions *master,* anyone?]< Betsy: Right, this one I do not understand. Snape is the Potions Master. That's his title. Is Lupin being excessive when he calls himself "Professor"? Should Dumbledore not be refered to as "Headmaster"? Master is often the title given to teachers within the British school system. All of my father's teachers were called Master in his school in Canada where they followed the British system. (And woe betide any boy who did not give a Master his due.) The other teachers at Hogwarts are known as "professor", IIRC, but I think that just suggests that Snape had further education to earn his title (probably in apprenticeship to another Potions Master). If his title were not earned I think the other teachers would mock Snape a bit. I also think JKR would mock Snape's false title, just as she did with Lockhart's supposed expertise. >>SSSusan: >*In clinical terms, empathy is the ability to recognize and interpret other people's emotions. Lack of empathy may take two different directions: (a) accurate interpretation of others' emotions with no concern for others' distress, which is characteristic of psychopaths; and (b) the inability to recognize and accurately interpret other people's emotions, which is the NPD style. >[Hermione's teeth and "I see no difference," anyone? You don't have to think he was deliberately choosing to show no concern, if you don't like; it can be a matter of his inability to accurately interpret how upset Hermione was.]< Betsy: Oh, I think Snape knew exactly what he was doing when he made that comment. It goes towards his nastiness. It was cruel, but it saved Snape from having to punish Draco for throwing a hex in the hallway, and angered Harry and Ron enough that Snape *could* punish them without acknowledging a fight that would have had young Malfoy serving a detention too. I'm quite sure Snape was fully aware of the emotions involved. (Though I don't think Snape is a psychopath, just a Slytherin.) >>SSSusan: >1) The former teacher in me blanches a bit at this. I, too, think Harry did better on his OWL than he/we would have expected. BUT there is an important difference for me between a) doing better than people will have thought and *in spite of* the teacher and b) a student reaching his most full potential;< Betsy: See, I think Harry did well on his OWL *because* of Snape, not in spite of him. Harry didn't study and learn potions because he had a love of the subject and wouldn't let Snape turn him off. He studied so that Snape wouldn't have anything to sneer at him over, and because if Harry didn't study Snape would have made his life an *even more* living hell. Plus, after the tension of Snape's classroom, the test itself was a breeze. Again, that is *because* of Snape. (And honestly, if Harry finds himself in a position where he needs to brew up an antidote, quick, he'd better be used to working under pressure. *g*) >>SSSusan: >2) Other lessons/information: occlumency, things he might need to know about Voldy, ways of defending himself ? things Snape may well be privy to from his time as a DE.< Betsy: And *I* don't want to get into another Occlumency argument. :) Though I still think Harry didn't learn occlumency because Harry didn't want to learn occlumency. I doubt Lupin would have fared much better. As to the others, Snape did "force" his students to learn antidotes, he's not allowed to teach DADA, and Snape would *never* share tidbits on any of the DEs (or Voldemort for that matter) unless specifically told to do so by Dumbledore. That's just good spycraft (another controversial subject *g*). >>SSSusan: >...his outrage over the lost Order of Merlin...< >>Betsy: >I've always thought Lupin was stretching the truth on this one [The] idea [is] so far out of whack with the Severus Snape we've met in the books that I think Lupin is making a sly dig....< >>SSSusan: >But we SEE the behavior for ourselves. Snape screams, he shrieks, he howls, we see the spit flying from his mouth!< Betsy: How does that have anything to do with the Order of Merlin? Snape is furious because Sirius Black, the man who tried to kill him while they were students, escaped his retribution, again, with the help of a Potter, again. (Harry, this time.) We hear nothing about the Order of Merlin until the next morning, from Lupin, who has a very good reason to make a very sly dig against Snape. Again, if there wasn't a personal history here, I could maybe go for the NPD diagnosis. (Though the Order of Merlin is *never* mentioned by Snape, Fudge, or Dumbledore during the entire screaming scene.) But Snape is almost reliving some of his most painful memories filled with Marauders escaping justice. It's not strange at all (once we have a further understanding of the history at work here) that Snape so completely loses it. >>SSSusan: >Again, I'm not saying anyone else has to buy into this model. *I* find it makes sense of some behaviors of Snape's that I *couldn't* make sense of before I considered it. >OTOH, I think one has to give the definitions/characteristics of NPD a real look before considering it bunk, rather than just thinking "narcissism = crazy" or "narcissism = extreme vanity." It's more complex than that. One has to get away from the notion that a narcissist is STURDY individual with a healthy, positive ego. There *is* an inflated ego presented to the world, and an arrogance. But it's an overcompensating, it's a masking a self-image which, while positive, is FRAGILELY so. In my mind anyway, the NPD reading makes for a more understandable -- simpler, if you will, in the end -- reading of the character of Snape.< Betsy: I hope I don't come across as too quickly dismissive. I did read through the research you've done. But the problem with the NPD diagnosis, as I see it, is that we are not seeing Snape in a vacuum. Snape has been reminded of a fairly ugly personal history since Harry came to Hogwarts. Several of his reactions are less than fully stable, but I think there are several understandable reasons behind Snape's reactions. I wonder what Snape was like before all of his demons popped out of the woodwork and settled in for a nice long visit. I'm sure he was still a strict, scary, Slytherin-favoring, bastard (especially in the beginning when many of the students were close to his own age) but I'm betting he was a bit more evenhanded in how he spread his vitriol and sarcasm about the classroom. The fact that Snape turned from Voldemort to Dumbledore at a time when Voldemort was winning the war, the fact that Snape left his friends to join with his enemies because he realized his friends were wrong all point to a strength of character I'm not sure NPD allows for. Betsy, whose original post was lost by Yahoo!mort, and had to retype this *whole* thing. :( From ehawkes at iinet.net.au Sun Apr 10 01:34:59 2005 From: ehawkes at iinet.net.au (Emma Hawkes) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 09:34:59 +0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <1113057664.11755.31334.m12@yahoogroups.com> References: <1113057664.11755.31334.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127363 Message: 10 Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 06:16:36 -0000 From: "Steve" Subject: Re: Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world bboyminn: I'm sure Bagman intended to give Arthur common seats until he found out Harry was going to be there. Then both Bagman and Fudge saw a great public relations opportunity, never hurts a politician to be seen with the hero of the wizard world, especially when that hero is a poor sympathetic orphan. Seriously.... great P.R. Oh yes, that makes so much sense. The seats would be comparable in cost to premium seats at the Olympics. Again, just filling in some miscellaneous info, I like to remind people that the Weasleys aren't as poor as Ron's whining might make them seem. They have spending money, a house and land, plenty of food to eat, and clothes to wear. They are working class. They have to manage their money well, they don't have spare cash for extravagances or luxuries, but they get by just fine. I don't think they are even working class. Class to me is about education and interests, not income. They are well educated and they spend on books etc. This means they are middle class people with not much money, from my perspective. Emma From juli17 at aol.com Sun Apr 10 01:38:46 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 21:38:46 EDT Subject: Snape's ambitions (was Re: Narcissistic!Snape) Message-ID: <79.4321d95d.2f89dda6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127364 > imamommy: > > I had a thought recently: why does Snape continue to apply for the > DADA position, when he's been turned down for fourteen years? Not > why won't DD let him have it, but why does he keep going after it? > > I came to the conclusion that DD may have given Snape some shred of > hope that, indeed, he might give him the job someday. If Snape was > never going to get the post, wouldn't DD just tell him, "forget about > it!"? So does that indicate that Snape has an understanding with DD > that when the time is right, he will be able to teach DADA? Julie: Good analysis. Clearly DD hasn't hasn't told Snape that he'll never have the position, or Snape would quit applying. Whether DD is stringing Snape along for some reason, or is waiting for the moment when he decided Snape is genuinely ready to teach DADA, I don't know. But it does support the idea that Snape will teach DADA before the end of the series. I'm betting on Book 7, when things become desperate. > > Along with that, why does he want to? He seems to be an excellent > potions maker; what does he feel he could do better in DADA? Surely > it wouldn't improve his method of teaching. Also, I would imagine > his knowledge of the subject would be quite extensive, but what does > he feel he has to offer more than anyone else? > > Comments? Julie: I've assumed that Snape does have plenty to offer as a DADA teacher. While he's excellent at potions, that ability could also be an integral element within the dark arts (and it's been theorized that Snape's potion-making expertise was put to good use by Voldemort). I think Snape is more than competent at DADA, which is why he wants to teach it. Snape is always very certain that *his* way is the best way, which may be another reason he wants to teach DADA. He thinks no one but him can teach students how to really defeat Voldemort. Given his years in the service of the Dark Lord, he may even be right about that! The best part of Snape teaching DADA, to me anyway, will be when he finds out that Harry outshines him in both ability and execution. Ouch, that's going to hurt. And it should bring a new dimension to their relationship, whether for good or bad. I'm betting JKR is well aware of that potential, and I don't believe she would be dwelling on Snape's continual desire to teach DADA if she wasn't going to do something with it eventually. Julie (certain Snape will teach DADA, but has been certain before and also mistaken!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 01:47:28 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 01:47:28 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127365 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy: > Or the reaction of Snape when confronted with a kid who closely > resembles the boy who sexually humiliated him and then nearly > killed him. This is sloppy Sirius 'nearly killed him', James 'sexually humiliated' him. It rather fits in with Narcissistic!Snape not to make fine little niggling distinctions like that, no? [I wonder if that one time that my friends Ducky got pantsed by a fratboy registered in his mind as sexual humiliation...] > Or confronted with a kid that showing an iota of friendliness > to would out his role as spy on the DEs. We the readers are fully > aware of how much Harry hates the spotlight. Snape is not. And, > frankly, after seeing James as a boy it's apparent why Snape made > the assumptions he did. I don't think it is. I think it takes a particular temperament, character, set of mind to look at a child from having known his father at school and go "Opp, just like the old man, he is", and then proceed to behave that way in the face of all evidence. > I also think JKR would mock Snape's false title, just > as she did with Lockhart's supposed expertise. She does mock his DADA knowledge... :) > Betsy: > See, I think Harry did well on his OWL *because* of Snape, not in > spite of him. Harry didn't study and learn potions because he had > a love of the subject and wouldn't let Snape turn him off. He > studied so that Snape wouldn't have anything to sneer at him over, > and because if Harry didn't study Snape would have made his life an > *even more* living hell. Plus, after the tension of Snape's > classroom, the test itself was a breeze. Again, that is *because* > of Snape. Digression: I have a friend here who encountered a professor who disliked her from the beginning, and made her course through one of the required subject areas as miserable as humanly possible--complete with personal cutdowns, snide remarks, etc. He taught the material in class and she learned it, so one might say "Why yes, she learned it from Professor Z". However, it would probably be more accurate to say that she learned it *despite* him, for his energies were devoted to telling her how inadequate and what an idiot she was. I see Harry and Snape paralleling this situation. Saying that Harry learned it because Snape was teaching it seems a profoundly facile reading of the situation to me, pegging off generally ill intent into the realm of "But he learned something, right?" > Betsy: > And *I* don't want to get into another Occlumency argument. :) > Though I still think Harry didn't learn occlumency because Harry > didn't want to learn occlumency. I doubt Lupin would have fared > much better. I think Lupin would have fared much better for the simple reason that Harry would trust him, as Harry has far more reason to trust him. Trust is a thing built upon everyday interactions. Daily pettiness and bile directed at a person is not conducive to building a bond of trust for working on something so deeply personal. > Betsy: > How does that have anything to do with the Order of Merlin? Snape > is furious because Sirius Black, the man who tried to kill him > while they were students, escaped his retribution, again, with the > help of a Potter, again. (Harry, this time.) We hear nothing about > the Order of Merlin until the next morning, from Lupin, who has a > very good reason to make a very sly dig against Snape. Actually, the general diagnosis stands whether it's the Order of Merlin or Sirius Black. It's the amazingly violent reaction to the 'disappointment' that makes one wonder. Not to mention that Snape set himself up for it in the first place by not heeding Dumbledore's words. > Betsy: > I hope I don't come across as too quickly dismissive. I did read > through the research you've done. But the problem with the NPD > diagnosis, as I see it, is that we are not seeing Snape in a > vacuum. Snape has been reminded of a fairly ugly personal history > since Harry came to Hogwarts. Several of his reactions are less > than fully stable, but I think there are several understandable > reasons behind Snape's reactions. But you know, it's completely and utterly not exclusive of the NPD explanation to note that Snape has problems with his personal history. It's the nature of the problems that he has, and the ways that they manifest themselves, that line up so neatly with aspects of NPD. Prominent amongst these are things thematically emphasized with Snape: his inability or unwillingness to rethink positions when faced with new evidence, his general arrogance and self-confidence in his own opinions, and the tendency to think that it's all about him (see all of PoA, for instance). Of course, a lot of this could prove out, or could not. It strikes me as a fairly weak explanation to just go "Oh, personal history" and not look very carefully at how and why that personal history is being processed, and the particular reactions made. -Nora still notes that the Draco pool is open for entries From mhbobbin at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 01:57:58 2005 From: mhbobbin at yahoo.com (mhbobbin) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 01:57:58 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127366 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chys Sage Lattes" wrote: > > > > > > > Antosha: > > > Too, there's the question of why you put an ancient wizard in a > series of stories starring a > > young hero. What else is he going to do but pass away? Fine, you > can have him around to > > swoop in after the heroic act is complete, as Gandalf saves Frodo > after the Ring has been > > destroyed. But even Gandalf died, if only to be reborn. Same with > Obi Wan. Or Merlin. > > Same with thousands of other wise men and women in thousands of > myths, folktales and > > novels. None of them are there at the last crisis. > > > > Mind, I'm not sure that both Hagrid and DD don't die. I'd just be > surprised if they both > > cash it in at the end of HBP--that's where I expect Dumbledore to > take his final bow. > > > > Chys: > > Wouldn't it be amusing if they were all alive and well at the end, > sort of break the chain of predictability there. > > I've heard that this story is related to The lord of the rings and > Star Wars and such, but why can't it stand on it's own, for the major > plot devices? (Especially since it's BEING written now... I don't > think it's going to follow what everyone expects of an epic like > this. I think we're in for some good surprises.) > > > Chys mhbobbin: Of course, the story stands on its own, with its own twists. But JKR has deliberately chosen to follow the storyline of classic Hero mythology, as did the original Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. She will have her own twists and she could still have everyone alive at the end but I am with those who think DD will be done at the end of Book Six. Others can elaborate on classic Hero storyline but it includes the Hero having a wise mentor; recieving "tools" to assist--(the map and invisibility cloak qualify), being tested and tempted to give up the mission; coming to terms with a father etc. The real key is that the Hero always faces his nemesis alone before he defeats him. The mentor cannot go with him, usually because he's already dead. Harry was sorely tested in Book Five, and probably will be in Book Six, but it is all to prepare him for a final showdown with LV. IMO. mhbobbin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 02:09:38 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 02:09:38 -0000 Subject: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127367 Antosha: Too, there's the question of why you put an ancient wizard in a series of stories starring a young hero. What else is he going to do but pass away? Mind, I'm not sure that both Hagrid and DD don't die. I'd just be surprised if they both cash it in at the end of HBP--that's where I expect Dumbledore to take his final bow. Chys: Wouldn't it be amusing if they were all alive and well at the end, sort of break the chain of predictability there. I've heard that this story is related to The lord of the rings and Star Wars and such, but why can't it stand on it's own, for the major plot devices? (Especially since it's BEING written now... I don't think it's going to follow what everyone expects of an epic like this. I think we're in for some good surprises.) Alla: Hmmm, I agree that if we are going by the "type" of the character Dumbledore is according to the literary tradition, he WILL definitely die, however I agree with Chys that it will be fun if JKR will break predictability chain. Earlier I raised the possibility that Dumbledore may survive till the end. NO, not because he is immortal ( I mean he can be, but I just don't want him to be :o)) I think that Dumbledore may survive if only to witness that his interpretation of the prohecy was wrong and solution which Harry comes up with to finish Voldie off will be something elegant and something that Dumbledore did not predict. I want to see the surprise on the old man's face for once. :-) JMO, Alla. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 02:27:50 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 02:27:50 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127368 Betsy: Or confronted with a kid that showing an iota of friendliness to would out his role as spy on the DEs. We the readers are fully aware of how much Harry hates the spotlight. Snape is not. And, frankly, after seeing James as a boy it's apparent why Snape made the assumptions he did. Nora: I don't think it is. I think it takes a particular temperament, character, set of mind to look at a child from having known his father at school and go "Opp, just like the old man, he is", and then proceed to behave that way in the face of all evidence. Alla: Yes, indeed. It is one thing to realise that Snape has reasons to have bad memories about James, which IF I get their complete personal history, I will fully concur with, it is another thing to say that Snape's feelings towards Harry at their FIRST meeting are justified, which I will never agree with. OK, Harry reminded him of James, fine, Snape has bad personal history with the boy's father. Does it mean that he has a right to react the way he reacted to Harry?. NOt IMO. If Snape cannot help himself though, the picture for me is getting MUCH clearer. It seems to be SO in line with narcissitic personality ( IMO, of course). Betsy: I also think JKR would mock Snape's false title, just as she did with Lockhart's supposed expertise. Nora: She does mock his DADA knowledge... :) Alla: Oh, yes. Cappa? JMO, Alla. From elfundeb at gmail.com Sun Apr 10 02:51:09 2005 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 22:51:09 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: References: <20050409112539.17567.qmail@web53906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a05040919517cf00ab6@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127369 Lynn: After all, it doesn't make sense to me that, if he was being victimized, Snape made sure to stay close enough to James to overhear his whole conversation while supposedly being totally absorbed in his exam. Harry was between Snape and James and had to strain his ears to hear after the exam while Snape seems to have been able to hear which speaks of trying to hear through all the noise, not of being absorbed in the test paper. Also, if Snape was such a victim, wouldn't he have made sure he didn't sit so close to James? > Again, I don't buy the deeply absorbed in the test paper explanation. Jen: Others make a pretty good case for the Pensieve acting as an objective viewing of a memory, taking into account everyone present and reflecting the scene pretty much how it happened in real life. > I'm in the objective Pensieve camp, which means I don't necessarily think Snape was eavesdropping on S&J from behind the shrub. The distance between the shrub and the beech tree is not mentioned, and when Snape stood up the text does not suggest that he saw S&J until James spoke. My impression was that he was virtually out of earshot, and when he did get up, he walked "across the grass" with no indication of whether he was headed toward S&J by the lake or back toward the castle . But even if he was eavesdropping, it was completely in character and not, IMO, inconsistent with characterizing S&J's actions as bullying. Jen: > Whether the memory is subjective or objective though, I do perceive > some elements of bullying in that scene. Two-on-one, public > humiliation....not exactly James' and Sirius' finest moment. *But*, > and this is a big but, I don't for a minute believe the tables > weren't turned on other occasions or that the one scene indicates a > pattern of bullying on the part of James/Sirius. I see this a bit differently. While a single scene like the Pensieve cannot in itself establish a pattern of bullying, I perceived James and Sirius as bullies *before* OOP. The Prank was, in my view, a bullying act. The inequality -- there are four Marauders, two of whom were active antagonists, and several admiring onlookers against only one of Snape -- gives the scene a bullying tone. And I'm sure Snape's other encounters with James were not one-on-one. Snape was unpopular enough -- Harry sensed this in the Pensieve -- so that James could likely rely on support anytime he chose to pick on Snape. > There was a reason they all hated each other so passionately, and I > can't believe James' explanation for attacking Snape "because he > exists" was the final word on the matter. That sounded more like an > attempt to impress Lily and pander to the crowd than an explanation. > What's he going to say? "Wah, Snape is mean to me all the time; just > the other day he..." blah, blah blah. Better the nonchalant answer > implying James has the power. I don't think James's comment "because he exists" is to be taken at face value. It only suggests a long history between them. (I imagine a scene on the Hogwarts Express in which 11-year-old Snape boasts to James of his Dark Arts prowess -- maybe with a little demonstration thrown in for effect -- and is greeted with a cold response not unlike Harry's to Draco in PS/SS.) > Jen: > This is another example why I can't believe there was a *pattern* of > bullying on the part of James and Sirius. A victimized person is > very sensitive to the routines and actions of an attacker. He > wouldn't willingly go anywhere near the vicinity of James and > Sirius, and in fact would be extremely careful to avoid them. In > that moment, Snape is either truly unaware J & S are around, > implying he's not overly sensitive to their prescence, or some part > of him feels up to the challenge. I don't think Snape's reaction is inconsistent with being bullied. Bullying is bullying whether or not the victim can take it. Dudley has a long history of bullying Harry, yet that doesn't prevent Harry from standing up to him, or make him cringe in fear whenever Dudley is around. Of course, Harry has gained something of an edge now that he can threaten Dudley with magic. Snape, I'm sure, has plenty of curses at his disposal to use against S&J, so he needn't cringe in fear, either. And we're told that he never lost an opportunity to curse James, so we know he fought back. Snape's sneaking around (according to Sirius) for a way to get J&S in trouble was simply another means of fighting back: he wanted to catch them doing something expulsion-worthy, because he was tired of them getting away with it. This is why he got suckered into the Prank, and why he didn't avoid S&J. Though he wasn't paying attention, his reaction indicates that he expected trouble as soon as he became aware (when James called "Snivellus") that they were in the vicinity: "Snape reacted so fast it was as though he had been expecting an attack: dropping his bag, he plunged his hand inside his robes and his wand was halfway in the air when James shouted, 'Expelliarmus!'" The phrase "expecting an attack" is interesting, because it suggests that, upon seeing S&J, Snape pulled out his wand in self-defense rather than aggression. And that, in turn, suggests that Snape has been attacked on other occasions when he came too close. After the Prank, Snape probably thought he'd finally gotten S&J on a charge that would stick and, if nothing else, raise him in Dumbledore's estimation at S&J's expense. Not only is there no mention in the books of any punishment (I know that doesn't mean there wasn't any, but it does make it likely that any punishment was not made public), but the outcome may have been the absolute opposite of the punishment he hoped for; by converting James from someone who wasn't Prefect material into a candidate for Head Boy, a title that Snape probably coveted in his time as much as the Order of Merlin in POA. Of course, arguing that S&J were bullies doesn't in any way give Snape license to curse them whenever he could. JKR didn't show us Snape on the offensive, however. She showed us one engagement in a war that had escalated over a very long period of time, but might not have done had Snape been able to walk away from anger. Debbie who found a whopping error in the first draft of this post and fears that another has slipped by unnoticed From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 03:04:59 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 03:04:59 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a05040919517cf00ab6@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127370 Debbie: I see this a bit differently. While a single scene like the Pensieve cannot in itself establish a pattern of bullying, I perceived James and Sirius as bullies *before* OOP. The Prank was, in my view, a bullying act. The inequality -- there are four Marauders, two of whom were active antagonists, and several admiring onlookers against only one of Snape -- gives the scene a bullying tone. And I'm sure Snape's other encounters with James were not one-on-one. Snape was unpopular enough -- Harry sensed this in the Pensieve -- so that James could likely rely on support anytime he chose to pick on Snape. Alla: Hm, I am not so sure about Snape being alone against four Marauders all the time, no matter how unpopular Snape seemed to be in that scene. There is that gang of Slytherins,which Sirius mentioned. I do think that it is a likely possibility that they were involved quite actively in interactions with Maraduers. I speculate that it is a possibility that in this year Snape was outnumbered because his gang was older and left the school. Is it possible that Bella and /or Lucius came up with some very nasty things while they were still in school and Snape was the only one against whom Marauders retaliated that year? Just speculating here of course, but there must be a reason for "Malfoy lapdog" comment, i think. Just my opinion of course, Alla. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Apr 10 03:24:09 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 03:24:09 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127371 Nora: > This is sloppy Sirius 'nearly killed him', James 'sexually > humiliated' him. It rather fits in with Narcissistic!Snape not to > make fine little niggling distinctions like that, no? [I wonder if > that one time that my friends Ducky got pantsed by a fratboy > registered in his mind as sexual humiliation...] Pippin: Um, Lupin says that Sirius "nearly killed" Snape. PoA ch 18 As for the sexual harrassment, Harry wonders how his mother could have married James and then wonders if he forced her. Think about that. Why does JKR have Harry wonder if James forced his mother into marriage, except to show that he understands there's a sexual aspect to what his father did? Nora: > I don't think it is. I think it takes a particular temperament, > character, set of mind to look at a child from having known his >father at school and go "Opp, just like the old man, he is", and then > proceed to behave that way in the face of all evidence. > Pippin: The evidence is hardly unambiguous from Snape's point of view. Is Draco like his father? A lot of us think so, and yet his actions could be interpreted in other ways if you were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. How odd that we expect Snape to show more discernment than the average fan And if we all agree that it would have been idiotic of Snape to listen to Sirius when he was told about how to get into the willow, then was it really irrational of Snape not to want to listen to Sirius in the Shrieking Shack? Pippin From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 03:36:47 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 03:36:47 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127372 Nora: I don't think it is. I think it takes a particular temperament, character, set of mind to look at a child from having known his father at school and go "Opp, just like the old man, he is", and then proceed to behave that way in the face of all evidence. Pippin: The evidence is hardly unambiguous from Snape's point of view. Is Draco like his father? A lot of us think so, and yet his actions could be interpreted in other ways if you were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. How odd that we expect Snape to show more discernment than the average fan Alla: I am afraid I really don't follow you, Pippin. :-) I would definitely NOT have thought that Draco is exactly as his father from the FIRST moment we saw him. We were specifically talking about the fact that Snape seems to classify Harry as James on their FIRST meeting, right? I absolutely don't see the similarities. If Snape would start to think about Harry as his father ... say couple years after he started Hogwarts, whether it was deserved or not, it would be a different story. Snape though makes a snap judgment, or seems to make a snap judgment about Harry the moment he sees the boy. Yeah, I'd say I DEFINITELY expect Snape to show more discernment than that, or actually now I don't since I am quite convinced by Narcissistic! Snape argument. Kid who, in Snape opinion thinks that he is so special,as Susan so eloquently put it, definitely needs to be taken down. :-) Just my opinion, Alla From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 03:42:07 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 03:42:07 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127373 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > Um, Lupin says that Sirius "nearly killed" Snape. PoA ch 18 > > As for the sexual harrassment, Harry wonders how his mother could > have married James and then wonders if he forced her. Think about > that. Why does JKR have Harry wonder if James forced his mother into > marriage, except to show that he understands there's a sexual aspect > to what his father did? To refresh your memory, Pippin, I was responding to this by Betsy: > Betsy: > Or the reaction of Snape when confronted with a kid who closely > resembles the boy who sexually humiliated him and then nearly killed > him. I find it slightly odd to ascribe to Harry the qualities of both Sirius *and* James on sight, no? [In other words, so far as we know, JAMES didn't try to kill Snape. Or am I wrong there?] > Pippin: > The evidence is hardly unambiguous from Snape's point of view. > Is Draco like his father? A lot of us think so, > and yet his actions could be interpreted in other ways if you > were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. How odd that > we expect Snape to show more discernment than the average fan Actually, we do. If we want to play with the idea that Snape is Dumbledore's right hand, Snape is sharp and perceptive, Snape is very good at figuring things out and thinking logically...it's a bit of a hole. Being as one general contention is that Snape is very skilled and important and hangs around with Dumbledore for a reason, I don't think it's amiss to expect more out of him, and search for some reasons as to the particular patterns for his failings. Should Draco suddenly pop up and show more depth next book, your point gains some credence, Pippin. The 'hints' need a little more validation, though. I don't have to bring up the "Oh, he was trying to HELP them in the QWC scene in GoF!", methinks. > And if we all agree that it would have been idiotic of Snape to > listen to Sirius when he was told about how to get into the > willow, then was it really irrational of Snape not to want > to listen to Sirius in the Shrieking Shack? I would generally consider it perhaps not irrational, but certainly irresponsible for a teacher of authority, with this personal relationship and some kinds of responsibilities to Dumbledore, to not be willing to, when he is in complete control of the situation, listen to another perspective before acting. It's not only Sirius he's not listening to, he's shut Lupin up and he makes especial effort to scream at Hermione. Why is he so interested in shutting her up after the events in the Hospital Wing, as well? I submit that at the present, the most straightforward reading is one where he really can't bear to be contradicted. I know that the DISHWASHER took this and ran with it, but I also foresee the DISHWASHER taking a nice long ride on the GARBAGE SCOW. Narcissistic traits makes partial sense out of some of Snape's particular failings, while leaving room for some of his particular virtues. The key here is to label what we do and do not know correctly, out of sheer politeness if nothing else. :) -Nora keeps on with the paperwork, of course From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sun Apr 10 04:28:25 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 04:28:25 -0000 Subject: Man the canons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127374 Alla: Hm, I am not so sure about Snape being alone against four Marauders all the time, no matter how unpopular Snape seemed to be in that scene. There is that gang of Slytherins, which Sirius mentioned. I do think that it is a likely possibility that they were involved quite actively in interactions with Maraduers. I speculate that it is a possibility that in this year Snape was outnumbered because his gang was older and left the school. Is it possible that Bella and /or Lucius came up with some very nasty things while they were still in school and Snape was the only one against whom Marauders retaliated that year? Just speculating here of course, but there must be a reason for "Malfoy lapdog" comment, i think. Bookworm: I agree with Alla that Snape was always alone when he faced the Marauders. It is possible that the "gang" had already left school. It is also possible, if they were in different years, that some were in class that afternoon. We only saw a short period of time when Snape happened to be on his own. Sirius told Harry that Snape was "part of a gang of Slytherins" (not the leader of it). According to the Lexicon, Lucius Malfoy is about 5 years older than Snape. Malfoy and Snape would have been at school together for only a year or two, but I suspect that Malfoy was the leader and Snape was his prot?g?. Maybe Malfoy kept in contact after he left and was using his influence to help Snape. But 2 people don't make a "gang", and hanging around with Malfoy for only his first couple of years at Hogwarts, IMO, wouldn't have prompted as strong a comment from Sirius, so there must have been others in the various years. Ravenclaw Bookworm From catlady at wicca.net Sun Apr 10 04:50:10 2005 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 04:50:10 -0000 Subject: Snape & Ships & Family Size, Paintings & Ages & More Snape, & magic Ferrets Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127375 Geoff wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127015 : << I don't think it was Lucius because Harry hadn't met him by then. >> Yes. That's why Draco was in the dream: Harry had met Draco already. But Draco, Snape, high-pitched laughter, and green burst of light were in the dream together as a result of Harry's forgotten memory of Lucius, Snape, Voldemort, and AK at Godric's Hollow. Draco, whom Harry had met, stood in for Lucius, whom Harry hadn't met, because those two look so much alike. Betsy horridporrid wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127017 : << [Snape is] Dumbledore's right hand man (McGonagall would be the right hand woman). >> Some listie once wrote that Snape was DD's left hand man, which I loved. allthingshp wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127022 : << > "B.G.": > "Her girlhood crush on Harry will be over and she'll > marry a man in the WW government and help him to > become the Minister Of Magic. " Or become the minister herself!! >> My favorite ship for the younger generation is Hermione/Ginny. I'm convinced that Hermione, starting as an outsider/activist with SPEW, will eventually become the first Muggle-born Minister of Magic, and Ginny would be a good help for that. I don't think Harry wants to be Minister of Magic: he doesn't seem to like administrating. Emma asked in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/127055 : << I wondered about family size too. Cedric Diggory doesn't seem to have any siblings (or at least none near enough him in age to be at school or to go to the world quidditch match). Is the usual family size small for wizarding people? >> I think, with the long lifespans of wizards as suggested by Dumbledore being 150 and McGonagall 'a spritely seventy', wizarding families could have as many children as is common for modern Muggles, but raise them all as only children. Say, marry straight out of school and have one child at age 20, another when you're 40, another when you're 60, and maybe the combination of later menopause with fertility magic would allow a fourth child born when you're 80. Was Theo Nott's late mother as old as his elderly father? Eustace_Scrubb wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127135 : << And as to the genre pictures that seem to abound at Hogwarts... presumably these are much closer to the photographs. The people may simply be artistic creations, fictional characters. What personality we see in these folks was probably a creation of the artist him/ herself--there may be bits of various real people in some of them, but they're just characters in a landscape. >> Are they really genre paintings or are they portraits of real deceased (and often deranged: Sir Cadogan) wizards and witches? JKR's remarks on the talking portraits leave me bewildered on that subject. On the related subject, whether the wizarding folk have fiction (other than Lockhart's memoirs and Skeeter's articles, falsehoods taken as true accounts by the readers), are there novels and plays in the wizarding world? In one interview, someone asked JKR what she would do for a living in the wizarding world, and she said, as there is nothing she would rather do that write, she guessed she would be a writer of spellbooks. Why not of novels? Don't they have novels in that world? It also made sense to me that they don't have recorded music (other than 'recorded' as sheet music) in the wizarding world, only live in person or live over the Wizarding Wireless -- that would explain why only kids who'd had access to the Wizarding Wireless doted on The Weird Sisters. But then JKR went and ruined that by writing in QTTA that Celestina Warbeck had recorded some team's fight song as a fundraiser for St. Mungo's. Well, if they have recorded music, how come no Gryffindor had played a Weird Sisters record in the Gryffindor Common Room?! Grey Wolf wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127141 : << I'd say the Malfoy Sr. has, tops, 50 years (more likely in his 40s, >> A Daily Prophet article early in OoP helpfully stated "Lucius Malfoy, 41, of Wiltshire'. Helpful but annoying to me, as I wanted him born in 1949 rather than 1954 (my DH was born in 1954!) and to have his estate near Chipping Sodbury, wherever that is. << The way it might be happening, the pure blooded families might have children quite spaced out, so they can bring up each in the complete luxury they're due because of their high station. In fact, I just realised that the Malfoy don't criticise the Weasleys so much for having too many children, as for the fact that they have more than they can afford. >> This is a forbidden "I agree" post (see above re:Emma). << In a slight tangential, it is interesting that the extended lifetime doesn't affect the WW more than it does - promotion congestion, extended education, late childbirth, etc that we see going on in our world. >> I quite agree. In particular, I'd like to see more children who are a bit older than their great-aunts or grand-uncles -- it would be easy enough to show a student already in Hogwarts being supportive to his great-aunt who is a new first-year. But I don't think JKR gave any thought to wizarding long lifespans: she just sees all these people in her head as doing things at the same ages as Muggles (old-fashioned Muggles like her own parents), except they retire later. Jim Ferer wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127218 : << Snape grew up in a painful, anxious home of emotional turmoil. He came to school as an oddball, greasy kid who knew too much Dark Arts - I doubt he found friends or any validation of himself. >> The validation he deserved for doing so well in all his schoolwork was ruined for him by James and Sirius and Lily always coming in number 1, 2, 3 (not always in that order) in all their courses so there was no prize for him. In a normal year, he would have taken 1st place and 2nd place in many of his subjects. I believe he found friends of a sort in Slytherin House -- I take Sirius's GoF statement about Severus having been part of a gang of Slytherins (who all became Death Eaters, Wilkes and Rosier who were killed by Aurors, Bellatrix and her future husband, and Avery who talked his way out of Azkaban but was seen at the Graveyard Gathering) and his OoP statement about being Lucius Malfoy's lapdog as messages from the author. He would have gotten some validation from these richer, prettier, and arguably older kids valuing his magical knowledge and abilities, for duelling, and maybe for doing their homework for them. That makes him having sent most of them to their deaths or to Azkaban by spying on them for the Light Side all the more painful to him. Alla wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/127220 : << Let's look at Snape's tirade and Dumbledore response again. "Sirius Black showed he was capable of murder at the age sixteen," he breathed. "You haven't forgotten that, Headmaster? you haven't forgotten that he once tried to kill me?" "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus," said Dumbledore quietly" - POA, p.391 It seems that Snape believes that Sirius tried to kill him only once , but now I do wonder whether he was sixteen at the time of the prank or not. I also still wonder what may Dumbledore's response mean. What DOES he remember? >> He remembers that Snape keeps nagging him on this same topic, and should shut up already. He remembers some loathsome things that Snape has done, maybe also at age 16, but at least as a Death Eater, and been forgiven for. He remembers that, when he brought the students involved into his office right after that event, he heard two quite different explanations of events. He remembers that Sirius has demonstrated the ability to be quite dangerous, so Harry and the other students must be effectively guarded. And? Emma Hawkes wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127332 : << Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world >> Nice essay. Thank you for posting it. << The mind boggles at the prospect of enchanted ferrets - what possible use can there be for such a thing? >> That would depend on what the enchantment (I typoed 'enhancement') is. Mortlake might be trying to re-invent Nifflers, or a version that would sneak into buildings, instead of dig in the dirt, to seek treasure. (Ferret burglars instead of cat burglars.) Maybe he'd use them to rob Gringotts Bank. If the enchantment involved giving them unobtainium-steel teeth or poison fangs, they might be used as assassins. Or maybe he gave them wings in hope of having them clean out Doxy infestations in the curtains... From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 05:24:40 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 05:24:40 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127376 >>Betsy: >Or the reaction of Snape when confronted with a kid who closely resembles the boy who sexually humiliated him and then nearly killed him.< >>Nora: >This is sloppy Sirius 'nearly killed him', James 'sexually humiliated' him. It rather fits in with Narcissistic!Snape not to make fine little niggling distinctions like that, no? Betsy: Erm, actually Sirius *and* James sexually humiliated Snape. And from Snape's POV, James *and* Sirius tried to kill him. James got "cold feet" and backed out of the joke. (PoA Scholastic Ed. p.285) Neat enough for you? >>Nora: >[I wonder if that one time that my friends Ducky got pantsed by a fratboy registered in his mind as sexual humiliation...]< Betsy: Yeah, I was waiting for someone to equate being dangled upside down, genitalia on display for a mixed crowd to laugh at (if James went through with his threat, of course) with getting pantsed. I think it's the length of time involved in the display that pushes it over the edge of school-boy antics into aggressive, sexual humiliaton, IMO. (If Death Eaters think it's good enough for Muggle torture, after all...) >>Nora: >I think it takes a particular temperament, character, set of mind to look at a child from having known his father at school and go "Opp, just like the old man, he is", and then proceed to behave that way in the face of all evidence.< Betsy: Good thing it's not that simple, huh? >>Betsy: >I also think JKR would mock Snape's false title, just as she did with Lockhart's supposed expertise.< >>Nora: >She does mock his DADA knowledge... :) Betsy: Not sure of your point here. Snape is still the *Potions* Master, right? >>Nora: >Saying that Harry learned it because Snape was teaching it seems a profoundly facile reading of the situation to me, pegging off generally ill intent into the realm of "But he learned something, right?"< Betsy: I was being brief, Snape's teaching style not being the point of the post. If you want a longer discussion on my views on Snape's teaching style, you can look at message 126800 where I go into a bit more detail. (Out of curiosity, how do *you* think Harry learned potions?) >>Betsy: >Though I still think Harry didn't learn occlumency because Harry didn't want to learn occlumency. I doubt Lupin would have fared much better.< >>Nora: >I think Lupin would have fared much better for the simple reason that Harry would trust him, as Harry has far more reason to trust him.< Betsy: I'm not sure how trust would overcome curiosity. Harry *wanted* to see what was in the DoM. He may have gone through the motions with a little less resentment, but he would have still welcomed the dreams. >>Nora: >Actually, the general diagnosis stands whether it's the Order of Merlin or Sirius Black. It's the amazingly violent reaction to the 'disappointment' that makes one wonder.< Betsy: See, this is where I get lost. As far as Snape is concerned someone who tried to kill him, someone he doesn't believe has changed, has escaped, with the help of a Hogwart's golden boy. Just like last time. I can't see that his reaction was all that out of line. And it's exactly this kind of thinking, "Snape's got a personality disorder, he wasn't *really* bothered by Black or Potter," that I was worried SSSusan's post would generate. >>Nora: >It's the nature of the problems that he has, and the ways that they manifest themselves, that line up so neatly with aspects of NPD. >Prominent amongst these are things thematically emphasized with Snape: his inability or unwillingness to rethink positions when faced with new evidence...< Betsy: Erm... So we'll just ignore that whole switching sides against his friends and his upbringing thing, then? >>Nora: >...his general arrogance and self-confidence in his own opinions...< Betsy: And I see we're also ignoring the whole Occlumency thing where Snape took on a task he detested soley because Dumbledore requested he do it. And the many times he put his personal feelings aside to make sure Harry was safe, from PS/SS to OotP. >>Nora: >...and the tendency to think that it's all about him (see all of PoA, for instance).< Betsy: Not sure I saw that tendency throughout PoA (or in any of the books for that matter). I *did* see Snape constantly questioning Dumbledore's trust in Lupin. Something Snape was quite right about, as it turns out. >>Nora: >Of course, a lot of this could prove out, or could not. It strikes me as a fairly weak explanation to just go "Oh, personal history" and not look very carefully at how and why that personal history is being processed, and the particular reactions made.< Betsy: Good thing I didn't just go, "Oh, personal history," huh? Kinda like just going, "Oh, personality disorder." A tad over-simplistic, yes? Betsy, not sure why her response generated such personal attacks, but rolling with the punches. From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 12:14:13 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 12:14:13 -0000 Subject: Man the canons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127377 > Alla: > > Hm, I am not so sure about Snape being alone against four Marauders > all the time, no matter how unpopular Snape seemed to be in that > scene. > > There is that gang of Slytherins, which Sirius mentioned. I do think > that it is a likely possibility that they were involved quite > actively in interactions with Maraduers. > > I speculate that it is a possibility that in this year Snape was > outnumbered because his gang was older and left the school. Finwitch: Actually, if you read the scene carefully - Snape wasn't REALLY ounumbered. It was a fight between James and Snape. OK, James began after Sirius said he was bored, but note that Sirius only became part of the fight AFTER Lily stood up for Snape, and only to counter the distraction Lily provided. After all, he DID heed to every request/order Lily gave him... Yes, that 'take off the pants' went a bit far, but do you know what I think James did? *WASHED* them with a scourgify, thus taking on account what Lily told Snape to do... (pretending to teach Snape *how* to wash his pants, no doubt...) After that, I think they left him be... Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 12:29:01 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 12:29:01 -0000 Subject: Goblins/Flitwick and involvement in the OoTP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127378 Betsy: > > Maybe the Goblins have no truck with half-breeds. There's nothing > > saying Wizards have a corner on the prejudice market. Plus, > > Dumbledore has Bill Weasley working on the Goblin front, so it is > > being covered. > > > > Chys: > > I totally forgot about that. I do think Goblins are more prejudiced, > they seem more haughty that others, aside from the centaurs. At least > they are willing to deal with wizards as if they are equals. Finwitch: Willing to give them benefit of doubt and listen, at least. Even Bagman got another chance of gamble about the Triwizard Tournament, even after that Leprichaun gold... And quite apparently, since Goblins are in charge for the *money*, ALL money of wizards, no less, well... I suppose goblins do feel appreciated by wizards. And of course, Goblins make money out of wizards. > Betsy: > I've long wondered if one of the staff won't suddenly turn traitor > > towards the end of the books, as Quirrill did. No canon or > > anything, just an idle thought. > > > (It's also one of the reasons I think the obstacle course at the > end > > of PS/SS was a trap to catch a DE rather than a learning experience > > for Harry. All the staff were involved in setting up the gauntlet, > > and Dumbledore obviously doesn't trust all the staff.) > > > > > > Chys: > > Filch anyone? > > Well- Vector, Binns.... I don't think they were involved with the > tasks. Maybe just the main featured people on the staff being > involved with it. > > Still, I was wondering why Harry is so against trusting Flitwick to > even try to contact Dumbledore for him? (or something of that nature) Finwitch: Is he? Perhaps it's just that Flitwick is not in the Order as far as he knows (he never met Professor Flitwick there) AND there's the first impression from Flitwick being so *awed* by the Boy Who Lived he fell from the books he'd been standing on. Second, it included SIRIUS. So far as Harry knew, FF was not included in the Padfoot-business. Third, there was the whole 'teachers not allowed to bla-bla-bla' so Harry wouldn't want to get FF in trouble, particularly as his Charms- OWL is already over... Finwitch From nrenka at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 13:01:39 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 13:01:39 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127379 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy: > Erm, actually Sirius *and* James sexually humiliated Snape. And > from Snape's POV, James *and* Sirius tried to kill him. James > got "cold feet" and backed out of the joke. (PoA Scholastic Ed. > p.285) Neat enough for you? Okay; from Snape's perspective, James is a direct participant. From Snape's perspective, it seems that everything done to him is due to be paid back in full to the next generation, as well. But let's not go further into talking about the Prank, because I don't buy your scenario or anyone else's at the moment. All are equally unlikely from the current perspective. > Betsy: > Yeah, I was waiting for someone to equate being dangled upside > down, genitalia on display for a mixed crowd to laugh at (if James > went through with his threat, of course) with getting pantsed. I > think it's the length of time involved in the display that pushes > it over the edge of school-boy antics into aggressive, sexual > humiliaton, IMO. (If Death Eaters think it's good enough for > Muggle torture, after all...) Of course, we have no idea what happened next, to be pedantically insistent upon textual support; what is implied by the lack of continuation is a blank to be filled by any reader. Parallels and differences. > Betsy: > Good thing it's not that simple, huh? I suspect it's going to end up simpler than most of us think. > >>Betsy: > >I also think JKR would mock Snape's false title, just as she did > with Lockhart's supposed expertise.< > > >>Nora: > >She does mock his DADA knowledge... :) > > Betsy: > Not sure of your point here. Snape is still the *Potions* Master, > right? I'm unconvinced of the assertion that 'Master' is a title alluding to extra schooling; it could be (although we know there are no wizarding universities, which doesn't leave out personal tutelage, but there's another blank for you), it could be standard, or it could be Snape's fussiness. But as a joking aside, JKR does set up a Snape who comes into the DADA classroom with disparaging remarks about another teacher, and then proceeds to make at least one mistake, and one pointed out by the hand of the author elsewhere. Seems a slight general puncturing of ego, IMO. > Betsy: > I was being brief, Snape's teaching style not being the point of > the post. If you want a longer discussion on my views on Snape's > teaching style, you can look at message 126800 where I go into a > bit more detail. (Out of curiosity, how do *you* think Harry > learned potions?) I think Harry learned Potions by working through it in class and out, but I think he managed to learn things despite the personally- targeted hostile treatment he received. The kind of obstacles Snape throws out and the kind of struggling with them involved is not the good kind of struggling with problems, it's the kind where you have to get through the mess to learn anything at all. Harry finds it so much easier when Snape isn't there--think of everything he could have absorbed more quickly without overt hostility in the classroom. It's much easier to learn when you don't have to worry about being singled out for special treatment. > Betsy: > I'm not sure how trust would overcome curiosity. Harry *wanted* to > see what was in the DoM. He may have gone through the motions with > a little less resentment, but he would have still welcomed the > dreams. If he had been working with a teacher who he felt like he could trust...well, let's go into the realm of the hypothetic. Let's say he's working with Lupin and gets his mind opened up. Instead of being told that he is not special and not to say Voldemort's name and all kinds of other things designed to reinforce our readerly suspicion of Snape ('Dark Lord' is even emphasized in the text: WHY does Snape use that?), he works with someone who asks him questions about his reactions and gives him feedback. Then, if/when things come up, we have a Harry considerably more inclined to be open. The curiosity wasn't present from the very beginning of the Occlumency lessons, but lessons founded on a more solid ground (per my own model, perhaps) might have done something. YMMV. > Betsy: > See, this is where I get lost. As far as Snape is concerned > someone who tried to kill him, someone he doesn't believe has > changed, has escaped, with the help of a Hogwart's golden boy. > Just like last time. I can't see that his reaction was all that > out of line. And it's exactly this kind of thinking, "Snape's got > a personality disorder, he wasn't *really* bothered by Black or > Potter," that I was worried SSSusan's post would generate. I never said it's that he wasn't really bothered. I said that his reaction to them makes sense with some of the aspects. It's bad enough that Fudge is calling Snape unhinged, and Snape has also gone around Dumbledore to try to get his way. It's the way that Black's escape is regarded as an utterly personal affront; it's more about what Black has done in the *past* to Snape than any conception of present guilt, etc. So here's a question for you: why does Dumbledore hang Snape out to dry in the way that he does? >> Nora: >> Prominent amongst these are things thematically emphasized with >> Snape: his inability or unwillingness to rethink positions when >> faced with new evidence... > > Betsy: > Erm... So we'll just ignore that whole switching sides against his > friends and his upbringing thing, then? That is important. However, we have absolutely no evidence as to motivation or what was involved here, so we have to plug it as a blank. You can't really argue from canon hypothetics, you have to note that it has influence, but no one knows what, of course. >> Nora: >>...his general arrogance and self-confidence in his own opinions... > > Betsy: > And I see we're also ignoring the whole Occlumency thing where > Snape took on a task he detested soley because Dumbledore requested > he do it. And the many times he put his personal feelings aside to > make sure Harry was safe, from PS/SS to OotP. And then he stopped the Occlumency lessons. Why, we don't know; it might have been approved of by Dumbledore, it might have been on his own volition because he thought he should. Of course, one could argue that Snape is only doing his duty as a Professor of the school, to take care of a student and do these niggling little things that Dumbledore, the man who saved him from trial as a DE, asks him to. >> Nora: >> ...and the tendency to think that it's all about him (see all of >> PoA, for instance). > > Betsy: > Not sure I saw that tendency throughout PoA (or in any of the books > for that matter). I *did* see Snape constantly questioning > Dumbledore's trust in Lupin. Something Snape was quite right > about, as it turns out. Something that Snape was *partially* correct about. Lupin's sins, as thematic for his character, are sins of omission rather than sins of comission, as Snape would have them. Snape seems more offended about Lupin's presence at the school at all, and is profoundly unprofessional when he takes Lupin's class. [McG is our standard there, and tells us "I won't badmouth another teacher to their class", which is exactly what Snape proceeds to do. Deliberate, the inclusion of the former.] In the Shrieking Shack, a lot of Snape's rhetoric is oriented towards "I done got you, Sirius Black, and you done me wrong". Snape gets so worked up that he seems to forget that it's not about what happened in the past ala schooldays, it's what happened ala traitors/etc. that should matter in that situation--and he won't even listen. > Betsy: > Good thing I didn't just go, "Oh, personal history," huh? Kinda > like just going, "Oh, personality disorder." A tad over- > simplistic, yes? You can put the things together, really. Snape has a personal history. Why on earth does he react to events from it with such intense fervor? Some aspects of the personality diagnosis illuminate patterns in his reactions, particularly the intensity of them and their resistance to more logical processing. There is a leap which has to be made to look at the child of someone (who you know is an orphan; it's open to debate what Snape knew/knows about Harry's life otherwise) and go "His daddy done me wrong; I'll learn that boy good". There's a particular override of personal issues over institutional (and other) duties that would lead one to the kind of madness shown in the Shrieking Shack, which cools into what might be either sincere or insincere deliberation, and then flares into a screaming hissy-fit at the moment of disappointment--when he had been told as much to go away and let his boss deal with it and trust in his boss. It's not like he's non-functional, or is completely described by said diagnosis, or doesn't have any number of virtues. At the way the text stands right now, the virtues have been mentioned but not shown, and thus inhabit a lesser realm of textual reality. [Ron vs. Hermione; direct knowledge vs. being content in an interlocutor.] If we want to make sense of the character being trusted, we need to be able to make sense of the failings as well. The pure personal history diagnosis says "Snape behaves the way that he does because he is Snape with this history", which doesn't seem very illuminating to me. The other one which says "Snape behaves the way that he does because he reacts to his personal history with these kinds of reactions and strategies" seems to tell me a little bit more. I suspect the brilliance of the character writing is in the setup, where he could current go any number of ways. Will it be less fun when some things are set, if it is revealed (a guess) that he's not just been playing Good DE Teacher but does it simply because he can? -Nora gets a good seat to watch the fandom complain about how JKR ruined Snape, which at least one person here or there or anywhere will make From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 10 13:10:51 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 13:10:51 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127380 Nora: > >Actually, the general diagnosis stands whether it's the Order of > > Merlin or Sirius Black. It's the amazingly violent reaction to > > the 'disappointment' that makes one wonder.< Betsy: > See, this is where I get lost. As far as Snape is concerned > someone who tried to kill him, someone he doesn't believe has > changed, has escaped, with the help of a Hogwart's golden boy. > Just like last time. I can't see that his reaction was all that > out of line. And it's exactly this kind of thinking, "Snape's got > a personality disorder, he wasn't *really* bothered by Black or > Potter," that I was worried SSSusan's post would generate. SSSusan: One quick note of clarification, from my point of view. To me there is a difference between using something to "explain away" behavior and seeing something which helps to explain it. For me, thinking of NPD does the latter. In this situation, in my reading of it, if what Snape was reacting to was Sirius' escape, it's not that Black or Potter didn't *bother* Snape and it's "just" a personality disorder speaking. Not at all. It's that Snape's reaction was so *extreme* that *shows* the disorder. I know some people feel they would have reacted the same way, but I think a lot of other people think Snape LOST it... and that's the crux of it for me. It's the *personalization* of it to the extreme. So on this matter, it's definitely going to come down to a reader's opinion over how extreme the reaction appeared to be or not be. Nora: > > Snape: his inability or unwillingness to rethink positions when > > faced with new evidence... > > ...his general arrogance and self-confidence in his own > > opinions... > > ...and the tendency to think that it's all about him (see all of > > PoA, for instance). Betsy: > Not sure I saw that tendency throughout PoA (or in any of the > books for that matter). SSSusan: You don't see these things; I do see these things. For instance, the first item, above. Snape couldn't see fit to believe in Black's innocence because he couldn't calm down & listen; he was so angry about what it meant for HIM. And not just in that moment, either. Do we ever see (or have reason to believe) that Snape wanted to find out the full details and why DD believed H/R/H/SB? This isn't my trying to come down on him and say, "BAD Snape!" nor is it "explaining away" Snape's behavior as in "He's not responsible for anything he does." Rather, it's asking, "Why does he do this?" and finding a construct which seems to help in making his behavior understandable, even if it's not what I'd have done. Siriusly Snapey Susan From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 13:58:47 2005 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 06:58:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Man the canons In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050410135847.20197.qmail@web20021.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127381 --- finwitch wrote: > > > > > Alla: > Yes, that 'take off the pants' went a bit far, but > do you know what I > think James did? *WASHED* them with a scourgify, > thus taking on account > what Lily told Snape to do... (pretending to teach > Snape *how* to wash > his pants, no doubt...) After that, I think they > left him be... > > Finwitch Forgive me, but I thought scourgify was used to "wash Snape's mouth out" not to do with his pants. "Pink soap bubbles stramed from Snape's mouth at once; the froth was covering his lips, making him gag, choking him --" Also note that is says "James and Sirius advanced on his, wands up" before Lily shows up. Even if Sirius wasn't actively doing anything, it was still pretty definitely two against one. They even said the reason they harassed Snape was that "he exists" and Lily said they hexed anyone who annoyed them. Then, after Lily left they hung him upside down in the air and James says "Who wants to see me take off Snivelly's pants?" Then the memory cuts off. I don't think there is any indication they left Snape alone after that. Rebecca __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From jferer at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 15:14:14 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 15:14:14 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127382 Betsy: See, this is where I get lost. As far as Snape is concerned someone who tried to kill him, someone he doesn't believe has changed, has escaped, with the help of a Hogwart's golden boy. Just like last time. I can't see that his reaction was all that out of line. And it's exactly this kind of thinking, "Snape's got a personality disorder, he wasn't *really* bothered by Black or Potter," that I was worried SSSusan's post would generate. To suggest Snape has a personality disorder doesn't mean that he wasn't really bothered by Black and Potter. They're not exclusive. Personality disorders are only labels anyway, useful descriptors of observed patterns. And his grudge against Sirius goes way beyond even Sirius's "attempt" to kill him. Snape's humiliation by Sirius cuts deeper. SSSusan: One quick note of clarification, from my point of view. To me there is a difference between using something to "explain away" behavior and seeing something which helps to explain it. For me, thinking of NPD does the latter." Exactly. We're looking for insight here, not excuses for Snape or anyone else. Nora: Snape: his inability or unwillingness to rethink positions when faced with new evidence...his general arrogance and self-confidence in his own opinions...and the tendency to think that it's all about him (see all of PoA, for instance)." I agree with Nora's observation, but not necessarily the characterization of it. Instead of "arrogance," I'd say "defensiveness;" and a lack of self-confidence as a cause of that. When Snape was a kid, I doubt anyone cared what he had to say, and his opinions never turned into working his will. Either Potter, or Black, or somebody snatched away anything he wanted, including his dignity. Now that he's an adult with some position of authority, he's absolutely dead set on getting his way and some payback, besides. How do people react when they feel they never got their way, or their just desserts? Persecuted? When they never felt they belonged to anything, or were accepted anywhere? Some become bullies when they get older; some become spiteful, intolerant, and recalcitrant when they can [they way they felt they were treated]; some join cults that appear to offer the acceptance and belonging they never had from more legitimate sources, or become Goths and hang around the mall making people uncomfortable. They do become self-absorbed, narcissistic if you will. Whether that constitutes NPD or not I don't know, but it looks similar to an observer. Jim Ferer From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Sun Apr 10 16:56:29 2005 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 16:56:29 -0000 Subject: House Elves and Slavery In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0503272020695903c9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127383 Responding rather late as I have only just seen this. Debbie wrote: > The differences between nonhuman beings and humans does make it very > difficult to claim that any species of beings is being used in the > books as a specific metaphor for something -- be it slavery, > housewives, or the servant class (in the case of the elves), the > mentally ill or HIV-positive (in the case of werewolves), or Jews > (which has been suggested as a metaphor for the goblins), though I > believe it is appropriate to assume that JKR is raising issues of > exploitation and prejudice in her depiction of the treatment of > nonhuman beings in the books. I rather see this the other way around. All the sentient characters must 'really' be human when we try to consider the relationship of the books to the real world, so unless JKR is purely spinning a yarn for its colour and adventure, they must all be metaphors for different aspects of human variety. If we are to empathise with these characters at all, then that very act turns them into humans, with our preoccupations, pains, and pleasures. I do see a tendency, though, for JKR to seek out difficult cases to test that empathy. Dobby gets our obvious sympathy as a slave: oh, let's have a Winky, and see what we now think. Abolitionists say she's only mentally conditioned, slavers say Dobby is the unusual one and elves prefer slavery. OK, then, let's have an elf who knows his own mind and is able to disobey manipulatively like Dobby, yet upholds the 'traditions': enter Kreacher. Other examples of this are the mandrakes and Grawp. How far can our empathy be stretched? David From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 20:18:25 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:18:25 -0000 Subject: Man the canons In-Reply-To: <20050410135847.20197.qmail@web20021.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127384 > > > Alla: > > > Yes, that 'take off the pants' went a bit far, but > > do you know what I > > think James did? *WASHED* them with a scourgify, > > thus taking on account > > what Lily told Snape to do... (pretending to teach > > Snape *how* to wash > > his pants, no doubt...) After that, I think they > > left him be... > > > > Finwitch > Rebecca: Forgive me, but I thought scourgify was used to "wash Snape's mouth out" not to do with his pants. "Pink soap bubbles stramed from Snape's mouth at once; the froth was covering his lips, making him gag, choking him --" They even said the reason they harassed Snape was that "he exists" and Lily said they hexed anyone who annoyed them. Then, after Lily left they hung him upside down in the air and James says "Who wants to see me take off Snivelly's pants?" Then the memory cuts off. I don't think there is any indication they left Snape alone after that. Alla: OK, that quote was all by Finwitch, NOT me. I absolutely agree with you that they used scourgify to wash his mouth. As to other things - I am very much in agreement with Jen. I don't think that "he exists" IS a complete reason of why that scene happened ( pretty disgusting scene, if I may add, but ONE scene). i think that we have NOT know the full story yet and even if I agree to call James and Sirius bullies in THIS scene, I don't think for one second that Snape was a victim throughout their school years. That is what I believe right now, unless canon proves me otherwise. :-) Whether they leave him alone after memory cuts off - I think that both possibilities are absolutely open since we don't have any indication one way or another. Alla wrote earlier: Hm, I am not so sure about Snape being alone against four Marauders all the time, no matter how unpopular Snape seemed to be in that scene. There is that gang of Slytherins, which Sirius mentioned. I do think that it is a likely possibility that they were involved quite actively in interactions with Maraduers. Bookworm: I agree with Alla that Snape was always alone when he faced the Marauders. It is possible that the "gang" had already left school. It is also possible, if they were in different years, that some were in class that afternoon. We only saw a short period of time when Snape happened to be on his own. Alla: OK, you meant to agree with me that Snape was NOT always alone with his interactions with Marauders, right? ;-) At least that is what I meant to say. :-) Just want to be clear on this one. Ravenclaw Bookworm: Sirius told Harry that Snape was "part of a gang of Slytherins" (not the leader of it). According to the Lexicon, Lucius Malfoy is about 5 years older than Snape. Malfoy and Snape would have been at school together for only a year or two, but I suspect that Malfoy was the leader and Snape was his prot?g?. ... But 2 people don't make a"gang", and hanging around with Malfoy for only his first couple of years at Hogwarts, IMO, wouldn't have prompted asstrong a comment from Sirius, so there must have been others in the various years. Alla: Bella was there too among others. I would imagine ( and that IS just speculation) that Sirius loving his family as much as he did ;-) would not have been friends with Bella and vice versa. I would also imagine that Sirius would not have had positive feelings towards any of Bella's friends. History with Malfoy is also very interesting. Does the above mentioned "Malfoy lapdog" refers to past or present or BOTH? Just my opinion of course, Alla. From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 21:04:18 2005 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 14:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Man the canons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050410210418.24162.qmail@web20025.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127385 --- dumbledore11214 wrote: > > OK, that quote was all by Finwitch, NOT me. I > absolutely agree with > you that they used scourgify to wash his mouth. > > As to other things - I am very much in agreement > with Jen. I don't > think that "he exists" IS a complete reason of why > that scene > happened ( pretty disgusting scene, if I may add, > but ONE scene). i > think that we have NOT know the full story yet and > even if I agree > to call James and Sirius bullies in THIS scene, I > don't think for > one second that Snape was a victim throughout their > school years. > That is what I believe right now, unless canon > proves me > otherwise. :-) Apologies. I think Snape was primarily a victim to them. A nasty person they decided they could do whatever they wanted to. He tried to fight back, but was an obvious failure. Why do I think this? Because of the way they treat him - with utter contempt. There's no rivalry there, no equality. They call him Snivellus (a name indicative of them seeing him as weak). He skitters like prey. They go after him because they're bored, not because giving any "last week he . . ." type reasons. Snape can't even form the words to insult them. He just screams "victim" to me - the type of victim who, when he gains real power, will be very dangerous because of the hate that fills him. Right now we only have one scene to go on, and I'm going to go by it. Obviously, we have Snape striking back. We know he hates them. When know he uses vile, racist language. But we also know that what they do to him is victimize him. I wonder what the difference in perception would be if Snape was female? Because what they did was assualt, with possible sexual undertones. I can guarantee you I'd have no qualms about putting them in jail for it. This wasn't an act of rage in the heat of an argument. It was cooly calculated victimization and assualt of someone they didn't like (a very unpleasant someone) for the sake of *entertainment*. And, though I don't believe they were anywhere near this bad with others, we know he waasn't their only victim. Rebecca __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Apr 10 21:57:24 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 21:57:24 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127386 Pippin: We already know that Snape has a personality disorder. He's a sadist. It doesn't add anything to my understanding of the character to put narcissism on top of that, particularly since we already have the pathologically conceited Lockhart. I wouldn't say Snape is pathologically conceited -- if he had saved Harry's life and turned in the notorious Death Eater Sirius Black, he would well deserve Harry's thanks, and an Order of Merlin second class. Hey, even Lockhart's got one of those. Sadism explains why Snape threatens Sirius and Lupin with Dementors at least as it well as it explains why Harry thought of sending Dudley home as something with feelers. As for why Snape followed James and Sirius out on to the lawn, it's typical of the kids who seem to draw bullying that they don't avoid their tormentors as much as they could. They have (speaking as an ex-victim) a rather self-destructive tendency to stand on their rights, and get thumped for it. They get some gratification in standing up for themselves, but unfortunately it gratifies the bully too, since what the bully wants, it turns out, is a victim who will fight back, but not well enough to win. It seems to me far more straightforward to see Snape as a fragile ego, struggling to avoid admitting that he can't defend himself. than as a hyperinflated one. Lockhart, when he knows he's outgunned, has no shame at all about running away. *That*'s* Narcissism. Pippin: > > And if we all agree that it would have been idiotic of Snape to > > listen to Sirius when he was told about how to get into the > > willow, then was it really irrational of Snape not to want > > to listen to Sirius in the Shrieking Shack? > Nora: > I would generally consider it perhaps not irrational, but certainly > irresponsible for a teacher of authority, with this personal > relationship and some kinds of responsibilities to Dumbledore, to not > be willing to, when he is in complete control of the situation, > listen to another perspective before acting. It's not only Sirius > he's not listening to, he's shut Lupin up and he makes especial > effort to scream at Hermione. Why is he so interested in shutting > her up after the events in the Hospital Wing, as well? Pippin: Why do you say Snape was in complete control? He wasn't -- he got knocked out! Snape had every reason to fear that Sirius or Lupin might be trying to put him off his guard so they could enchant him. Death Eaters Don't. Need. Wands. Was it conceited of Snape not to want to listen? I don't think we give due credit to the wizards' ability to confound the will. We are too steeped in our Western liberal notion that thought is free and inviolate. Well, it ain't, not in the wizarding world, anyway. Bill:"Well, the main thing is to try and convince as many people as possible that You-Know-Who has returned, to put them on their guard." Lupin: "..most of the Wizarding community are completely unaware that anything's happened and that makes them easy targets for the Death Eaters if they're using the Imperius Curse." In the Wizarding World, it may indeed hurt to listen. I think Snape may see this as Hermione's Achilles heel, the one form of magic she knows about but has always discounted.She understands that magic can rob people of their freedom; I don't think she understands that it can steal even the *idea* of freeedom. She appears to think she would know if she were confunded. She's unable to understand why the House Elves don't want to be free and she hasn't exactly made a secret of her campaign to free them, so Snape would certainly know about it. (Incidently, this blind spot could explain Hermione's lack of curiosity about the Occlumency lessons and Voldemort's manipulation of Harry's dreams.) Was it conceited of Snape to follow Lupin to the Shrieking Shack? He thought Lupin was alone. But once he realized Harry, Hermione and Ron were there too he could hardly abandon them and go to get help. I really can't square Narcissistic!Snape with the man who grips the back of his chair as he asks how McGonagall can be sure someone has been taken by the monster, or the one who saved Harry's life first year and has never yet brought it up to him. Not once. Pippin From Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 9 23:59:49 2005 From: Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com (unicorn_72) Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 23:59:49 -0000 Subject: Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: <20050409112539.17567.qmail@web53906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127387 I'm not really replying to any partcular post, I'm just replying in general with questions and comments on Snape and Sirius etc etc In the Pensieve scene, somehow I think JKR is trying to give us something about Snape, maybe it's to show Harry and the reader can find we are feeling a bit sorry for Snape. It could be like so many have speculated he put the memory there on purpose for Harry to see....its hard for me to say what exactly it is. But, on it being fake or made up or changed, I don't know, Harry tells Sirius and Lupin the whole story of what he saw. It says in the book, I quote: He(Harry) therefore plunged immediately into the story of what he had seen in the Pensieve. When he had finished, neither Sirius nor Lupin spoke for a moment. This tells me, they obviously got the whole story of what Harry saw, then Lupin does says: "I wouldn't like you to judge your father on what you saw there Harry. He was only fifteen" Harry says "I'm fifteen" etc etc Then Lupin goes into the whole explaination of why James and Snape hated each other. The fact that Lupin actually says "And Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the dark arts..etc..etc I don't know, It just seems like they (Sirius, James, Lupin) were the cool kids, and Snape was not, that scene/situation/story has been played out for all the world to see in so many movies and real life events I can't count them. It seems to me that they both know the whole of what Harry saw, because he told them, unless he left out stuff, but I am just going by the book here. So, it seems to me if there was something different in the memory, then they would have said...hay Harry it didn't happen that way, Or I never said that etc etc. Unless Harry didn't tell everything he saw, but why would what I just quoted lead me to believe he did..meh..anyway. Now, my question is, and I think I've posed this before. Why did Lily help Snape?? Shes a Griffindor, he's a Slytherin, Ok Yes, I get that shes good, and wonderful etc etc. But, If we consider Hermione and Draco in there fifth year and we take Lily and Snape in there fifth year. Lily would be sort of in the same position. Harry, Ron, Hermione all Griffindor, all friends. Sirius, James, Lily..all Griffindor....not close friends? Lily thinks James is a show off? wait wait..I'm confused....wouldn't they know each other just as well as Harry Ron and Hermione, ok, so they don't hang out. But they are all 5th year in this Pensieve scene. So wouldn't Lily know Snape just as well as Hermione would know Draco in their 5th year? So whats going on here? I can't see Hermione's defending Draco against say Ron, or Harry. So, is Lily just that good of a person to defend someone she has known for five years that is supposed to be a terrible guy all in the dark arts? I mean. wouldn't she know it. I know she says James is as bad as he is, but, it just seems like something is not clear here. I mean, its almost written out like Lily doesn't even hardly know them, or maybe I'm just reading too much into it and she's just angry because she doesn't like to see anyone get attacked by more than one person. But, it just seems weird on her part, if Snape was so mean and nasty then, why would see even bother, I just think she would have to know enough about him to know if he deserved it. I have a feeling Hermione would not help Draco if Harry and Ron were being mean to him....but I could be wrong on that too..meh. But, if the scene is real and we can take it at face value, and at the moment I have to because obviously Sirius and Lupin have heard what Harry saw, they didn't say it was wrong, or totaly different from how they remember it, then it seems to me it was just a classic case of the Popular boys, picking on the nerdie oddball guy. It also seems to me that Snape was not very Slytherin in his approach to the situation. I believe that, Slytherin's are supposed to be able to save there necks, so stated by I believe Sirius's grandfather? One of the portraits I forgot who said it, anyway, yet, Snape is ready to fight them...if he could only reach his wand, he did not run away, he wanted to fight. But, thinking on it, He followed them around, its said to get them into trouble, but, somehow I imagine, in some way, maybe he wants to fit in. Isan't it sometimes the case with those who are oddballs and nerds, that they only want acceptance. Maybe at some point, he might have imagined even being friends with them? I know that sounds strange, but, if I remember correctly, Draco came up to Harry and wanted to make friends, for whatever reason, even though he was nasty about Ron. I just wonder, if something similar could have happened. Why would James and Severus the 11 year olds, hate each other on sight? Did some similar situation come up? This is a question I really want to know Did they (Snape,James,Sirius) all know each other before they went to Hogwarts??? And Somehow I'm leaning towards Sirius and Snape are some sort of KIN to each other, cousins or..something, I don't know, I know others have speculated on it. I could be totally wrong on it, but somehow there is something more their...meh...but we have till July to hope for some answers...Please please I don't want to wait till book 7 (laughs) KarentheUnicorn From d.marchel at comcast.net Sun Apr 10 02:19:55 2005 From: d.marchel at comcast.net (Dysis) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 02:19:55 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127388 As I was studying the excerpt in Book 5 where Harry breaks into Snape's thoughts, I noticed something odd. "A greasy haired teenager sat alone in a dark bedroom, pointing his wand at the ceiling, shooting down flies..." [US Verion, Book 5, pg. 592] This memory of Snape's is strikingly similar to another event in Book 4, when Crouch!Moody is teaching the class how to use Unforgivable Curses. He uses spiders to demonstrate the curses, and kills one with the Killing Curse [US Version, Book 4, Ch. 14]. Of course, we don't know if teenage Snape is using the Killing curse (or if it's even Snape, for that matter...). But we haven't been introduced to many other spells that can create those same effects. The Binding spell, which Hermione used on Neville in Book 1, is a possibility. However, I get the feeling that JKR deliberately included insects in both stories to catch our attention. Assuming that it is Snape, and that he is using the Killing Curse as a teenager, we have to wonder (1) where he learned it, (2) how powerful he must have been, and (3) why was a teenage kid using an Unforgivable Curse when he knew full well that the Ministry had and Underage Wizarding Policy. For the first two, I think we can reasonably conclude that Snape was and still is good at the Dark Arts. After all, he was completely immersed in his DADA OWL as we see in "Snape's Worst Memory." And also, hasn't he been applying for the DADA teacher position ever since we've known him? Where he learned it, well that's still a mystery, unless someone out there has a good theory. But it wouldn't have been too hard. We've seen repeatedly in the books that Snape's a powerful wizard. However, I'm most interested in how the Ministry didn't send him a letter for Underage Wizardry. The Ministry uses special magic to detect when an underage wizard has done magic. Yet, we see a teenager doing magic in his own bedroom without any qualms. Does he know some sort of spell that shields him from the special magic that the Ministry uses to detect underage magic? But what bothers me even more is that the Ministry doesn't have a special detector of the Unforgivable Curses in general, and not just by underage wizards. Why can the Ministry detect Underage Wizardry, which isn't more than a felony, when it can't detect Unforgivable Curses? Magic is magic, isn't it? The only possible explanation I could think of for this is that Malfoy Sr. had so much power in the Ministry that he successfully deterred any attempts to create such a detector. Any ideas? dysisgirl From bethanymil79 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 11:33:51 2005 From: bethanymil79 at yahoo.com (Bethany) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 11:33:51 -0000 Subject: Will Ron Die? (was: Re: Ron's career choice) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127389 mallrat42 wrote: I think the only career choice Ron is going to have is a harp > player because I, along with some of my friends who read the > books, think that Ron is going to perish. I know everyone is > going to attck me here, but, there are a lot of people who > think that. Hey, if I'm wrong, then I'm worng. However, I won't > stand down until I read it for myself. > I think that if the first book and the tasks were sort of a foreshadowing of things to come, then it is a great possibility that Ron will die. As he sacrificed himself in the chess match for Harry to go on, so he may sacrifice himself in the end as well. Another illusion to it is in Goblet of Fire when the Mermen take Ron as the "thing that Harry would miss most." Maybe, we are seeing that Ron will be taken in the end??? Just a couple of thoughts on the matter... -Bethany From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 12:28:21 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 12:28:21 -0000 Subject: JKR's site Rumours Section/DD Immortal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127390 > Alla: > > Hmmm, I agree that if we are going by the "type" of the character > Dumbledore is according to the literary tradition, he WILL > definitely die, however I agree with Chys that it will be fun if JKR > will break predictability chain. > > Earlier I raised the possibility that Dumbledore may survive till > the end. NO, not because he is immortal ( I mean he can be, but I > just don't want him to be :o)) > > I think that Dumbledore may survive if only to witness that his > interpretation of the prohecy was wrong and solution which Harry > comes up with to finish Voldie off will be something elegant and > something that Dumbledore did not predict. > > I want to see the surprise on the old man's face for once. :-) Chys: I think it's all stereotypes anyway, but live or die, it's going to be a world famous conclusion. (It can't help but be at this point.) It just makes me wonder exactly how this is all going to accumulate in the end. Some thoughts of mine: I see Harry as the 'young mischievious monkey' type character and DD is the 'old wise monkey' type. (It's ok if you don't follow me, it's from a story I read.) Eventually if Harry lives long enough, he's gonna grow up and be like the old wise man, and all will be well, but only one monkey can rule monkey mountain, dude. Thus no DD in the end, probably. *Just me rambling on mythology/character ideas* I disagree that DD is immortal -in that way- for his ideal, or the spirit behind his character can never die- But I suppose he can be immortal if he's like the phoenix, but he would have to die and be reborn if he were and that would be a problem seeing as if he were reborn as an infant like Fawkes seems to be a chick again, then there'd be no way he could help Harry in the end; thus the classic Hero confrontation for LV and Harry would ensue on schedule. Yeah. I think that's the way to go. What could he come up with that's more elegant, eh? The final confrontation- Chys' style *hides the few remaining braincells*: HP: *shoots random magic from his wand* LV: *gasps and shrinks* DD: *stumbles onto the scene* What happened?! HP: *holds up a twitching frog* Uhm, his name's Tom, can I keep him? DD: O.o;; Chys From sweetpuppylove at gmail.com Sun Apr 10 12:31:38 2005 From: sweetpuppylove at gmail.com (V) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 12:31:38 -0000 Subject: Money, bribery and corruption in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127391 Emma Hawkes wrote: > > ...However, it is revealed that Arthur Weasley did not actually > > have to buy his tickets - they were donated by the dodgy Ludo Bagman > > (whose very name reeks of implied bribery). Yes, it does imply bribery, but it says in American edition GoF, chapter five, that Ludo's brother, Otto, "...got into a spot of trouble - a lawnmower with unnatural powers..." and Mr Weasley says, "I smoothed the whole thing over." and that the tickets were because he did Ludo a "bit of a favor". While I don't believe Arthur Weasley would blackmail Ludo or 'hint' to him about tickets, I wonder if Ludo gave the tickets as a Thank-you-now-please-don't-tell-anyone type gift? Sage From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 10 22:59:55 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 22:59:55 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127392 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chys Sage Lattes" wrote: Tonks: > > Well this might not be the popular idea, but I think that DD is > > imortal. snip So if I think that out, I guess > > it means he dies at some point, but never really. He always comes > > back. So in that way DD can never die. After all in SS/PS he says > > that he will never be gone from Hogwarts as long as someone there > > needs him, or was it believes in him. Anyway I think that means that > > he can not die. snip Chys: > I think it's more that the IDEA of him (The champion/helper whatever) > cannot die, and that in that respect, he's like the phoenix. That > could spur others onward, like how Harry had thought of DD and that it > was encouraging like the Phoenix song was uplifting. imamommy: I think this plays into the them that's already been introduced: that Harry needs to learn that (in this series, at any rate) death is not the end, there is an existence beyond the veil, and the ones we love never truly leave us. (That's a movie quote, I know, but I like it.) Whether DD will be proven physically immortal, as Tonks suggest, or whether he will only live on in legacy and memory, is anyone's guess. I hope, for his sake, he gets to leave the confines of this world and go on to a better place, but that's just me. imamommy From elfundeb at gmail.com Sun Apr 10 23:36:05 2005 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (Debbie) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 23:36:05 -0000 Subject: Man the canons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127393 Alla: > Hm, I am not so sure about Snape being alone against four Marauders > all the time, no matter how unpopular Snape seemed to be in that > scene. > > There is that gang of Slytherins, which Sirius mentioned. I do think > that it is a likely possibility that they were involved quite > actively in interactions with Maraduers. That would seem logical, based on Sirius' assertion that Snape hung out with a gang of DEs in training. However, in all of the discussions, only Snape is mentioned. For purposes of the story, Snape had to encounter MWPP alone in the Pensieve scene, but it seems very odd that Snape did not exit the Great Hall with his gang of Slytherins if they were in his year. Alla: > I speculate that it is a possibility that in this year Snape was > outnumbered because his gang was older and left the school. If Snape's gang was older, he might not have had a lot of contact with them outside the Slytherin common room and the Great Hall, whereas Snape likely encountered James and Sirius in classes, giving J&S plenty of opportunity to harass Snape without his support system. Harry also surmises based on what he sees in the Pensieve that Snape was unpopular. On that basis, I further surmise that the *only* people who took any interest in Snape were the "gang of Slytherins" Sirius mentions, and that their interest in Snape was primarily, if not solely, because of his Dark Arts prowess. Sirius says he arrived at Hogwarts knowing more curses than most seventh years, and I'll bet people like Lucius and the other future DEs were eager to learn them. But their interest in Snape may have been more or less confined to Dark Arts, leaving Snape alone very frequently with his misanthropic personality and his poor hygiene. > Bookworm: > Sirius told Harry that Snape was "part of a gang of > Slytherins" (not the leader of it). According to the Lexicon, > Lucius Malfoy is about 5 years older than Snape. Malfoy and Snape > would have been at school together for only a year or two, but I > suspect that Malfoy was the leader and Snape was his prot?g?. I bet Snape did at one point invoke Malfoy as protector, but that it just provided S&J with more ammunition. The "lapdog" taunt is, I suspect, very old. I also suspect that Lucius made Snape his protege *because* Snape arrived at Hogwarts already up to his eyeballs in the Dark Arts, and that Lucius played the part of DE recruiter. Alla: > History with Malfoy is also very interesting. Does the above > mentioned "Malfoy lapdog" refers to past or present or BOTH? I think it's both. Perhaps Lucius was a kind of substitute father figure for Snape at Hogwarts? Based on the glimpse we get in the Pensieve of Snape's childhood, he certainly needed one. I'll bet that Snape had other mentors, too. Like Dumbledore. And that he rejected Dumbledore and embraced Lucius and the DEs after Dumbledore's elevation of James to Head Boy proved to him that following the rules, or indeed any moral code, does not pay. Debbie thinking "Snivellus" may sum up the adolescent Snape very well From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 23:51:10 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 23:51:10 -0000 Subject: Man the canons In-Reply-To: <20050410210418.24162.qmail@web20025.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127394 Rebecca: Apologies. Alla: Tbat's Ok, I just wanted to be clear on where I stand. Rebecca: > I think Snape was primarily a victim to them. A nasty > person they decided they could do whatever they wanted > to. He tried to fight back, but was an obvious > failure. > Right now we only have one scene to go on, and I'm > going to go by it. Obviously, we have Snape striking > back. We know he hates them. When know he uses vile, > racist language. But we also know that what they do > to him is victimize him. I wonder what the difference > in perception would be if Snape was female? Because > what they did was assualt, with possible sexual > undertones. I can guarantee you I'd have no qualms > about putting them in jail for it. This wasn't an act > of rage in the heat of an argument. It was cooly > calculated victimization and assualt of someone they > didn't like (a very unpleasant someone) for the sake > of *entertainment*. Alla: We definitely have to agree to disagree on this one. I cannot and will not go on this one scene, which we are not even completely sure is objective. For the record, I do think that it is more likely to be objective than not. Regardless, I don't think it shows a complete picture. I will happily eat my words if I am wrong at the end. :-) I also thinks that in Pensieve scene itself there are possible hints that not everything as it seems at the first sight. Even here, even outnumbered, Snape manages to draw blood, so know I don't consider him a failure in fighting back. I think that was Vmonte who came up with very good hypothetical, which shows that Pensieve scene may not show complete story, even id it records events truthfully. Let's imagine Draco putting events at the end of GoF in the Pensieve AND us viewing those events from the moments Gryffs drew their wands. Don't you think that Draco will come out as poor blameless victim? Just my opinion of course, Alla From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 10 23:53:19 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 23:53:19 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127395 >>Betsy: >And it's exactly this kind of thinking, "Snape's got a personality disorder, he wasn't *really* bothered by Black or Potter," that I was worried SSSusan's post would generate.< >>Jim Ferer: >Personality disorders are only labels anyway, useful descriptors of observed patterns.< Betsy: Are they? I was under the impression that a personality disorder is a disease, a chemical imbalance in the brain that can only be helped with proper medication. Unlike, say introversion, which is more a personality trait, someone suffering from a personality disorder has no control over their reactions to certain stimuli. To my mind, by ignoring all the personal history behind Snape's reactions to Lupin and Black, ignoring all the various motivations at work regarding his interactions with Harry, and lumping it all under the heading of NPD, is akin to seeing someone screaming in horror while immersed in a pit of rats, and saying, "Ah yes, must have a rat- phobia." I don't believe that's what SSSusan was going for at all, but other posters *have* dismissed what JKR has given us of Snape's past to say, "He's just crazy, that one." Which I think gives little credit to Snape and to JKR for that matter. >>SSSusan: >One quick note of clarification, from my point of view. To me there is a difference between using something to "explain away" behavior and seeing something which helps to explain it. For me, thinking of NPD does the latter."< >>Jim Ferer: >Exactly. We're looking for insight here, not excuses for Snape or anyone else.< Betsy: I really *do* understand what SSSusan was going for. But I think it takes personality disorders a little too lightly. A family member of mine suffers from a personality disorder, and it's a hell for her. Probably the hardest part has been realizing that she can't just will the problem away. It's only through medication and fairly intense therapy that she's made any headway. Snape has his demons, yes. But not of this sort. Snape is a fasinating character, and there's a lot going on as far we've been shown. He's great fun to dissect and peer at because JKR has dropped such tantilizing hints at the whys and ways of his actions. If it turns out that Snape has a mental disease, doesn't that negate all the background information JKR has been feeding out to us in such delicious drips and drabs? Because if Snape is really suffering from NPD, it doesn't matter if he was the class victim or the class bully or the class golden boy. All of his reactions to the various plot twists encountered throughout the books would be because of a chemical imbalance. Rather boring denouement, IMO. Of course, I could be completely off base in how I'm seeing personality disorders. I'm sure if I am, I'll be corrected. :) Betsy From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 00:02:19 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 00:02:19 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127396 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin: > Why do you say Snape was in complete control? He wasn't -- he got > knocked out! He wouldn't have gotten knocked out if he had shut up and listened and not pushed it. :) [It's only after he really starts *raving* that HRH knock him out, after all. Is it interesting that his raving is of the "You idiot you should be thanking *me* variety? I find it to be so.] > Snape had every reason to fear that Sirius or Lupin might be trying > to put him off his guard so they could enchant him. Death Eaters > Don't. Need. Wands. Are you saying Snape isn't competent enough to tie two people up right good and keep his attention focused on them while listening? Doesn't speak well for his management abilities... No, really. Maybe I'm just being forgetful, but I don't remember any broad presentation of DEs doing scary things sans wands, although I haven't re-read the battle scene in OotP in a while. Snape is able to control the cords he summons without a wand, but wandless magic is more of a fanon creation than a known quantity. > Was it conceited of Snape not to want to listen? > I don't think we give due credit to the wizards' ability to confound > the will. We are too steeped in our Western liberal notion that > thought is free and inviolate. Well, it ain't, not in > the wizarding world, anyway. My question about confounding is rather a different one: Is Snape sincere when he states that the children are Confounded in the Hospital Wing, before Dumbledore gets there? If he is, that's one wa to read the earlier scene. If he's not, then why is he so intent upon shutting them up (enough to shout at Hermione yet again)? It's potentially sincere and potentially skeezy, and one can argue for it either way. > I really can't square Narcissistic!Snape with the man who grips the > back of his chair as he asks how McGonagall can be sure someone > has been taken by the monster, or the one who saved Harry's life > first year and has never yet brought it up to him. Not once. I don't think it means that he can't be concerned and doesn't care. There's an unknown hanging over this of why Snape ditched the DEs, which should tell us something deep about his character, be it self- interest, moral conversion, revenge--I don't know, and neither does anyone but JKR. The narcissism aspect does speak to some of the insecurities and behavioral peculiarities that he seems to evince. He doesn't say anything about the first-year incident (not that everyone agrees that is a straightforward case of 'Snape saves Harry's *life*'), but one wonders if the "You should be thanking me on bended knee" isn't an explosion of built-up frustration. C'mon, Severus--tell us how you really feel. -Nora wonders how incommensurate JKR's horizon will become with the fandom From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 00:11:35 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 17:11:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Snape nice or good? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050411001135.59705.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127397 >>> --- JaanisE wrote: >>> So, Snape really is not so good after all, he's horrible, >>> sadistic, not pleasant - from the quotes. We only call him good >>> because he's on the OotP's side. > >> Magda: >> Well, that's the only "good" that really counts in the end, isn't >> it? > > Nora: > Any means to achieve an end? Not a principle that's gotten > unqualified support so far in the series, it seems to me. One > question which is not really solvable right now is whether it is > (good, right, take your pick of adjectives) to tolerate behavior > that > is generally not considered (insert positive adjective here) > because > the person carrying it out is also responsible for things that are > (second positive adjective here). I don't think it's that philosophical a question. At the end of the day a good guy is someone who's on the side of right, not someone who's just pleasant or nice or "not a git" or "people like us". I would phrase your principle a different way: it's important to be able to look past the superficial into the real person before judging them. Harry hasn't yet learned this lesson; it's still rather scary how he handed over the map to Fake!Moody in GOF largely on the basis of an apparent mutual distaste for Snape. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 00:31:32 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 00:31:32 -0000 Subject: Is Snape nice or good? In-Reply-To: <20050411001135.59705.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127398 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > Magda: > > I don't think it's that philosophical a question. At the end of the > day a good guy is someone who's on the side of right, not someone > who's just pleasant or nice or "not a git" or "people like us". Does that mean that everyone who is on the side of right is automatically good? [I think there are more distinctions to be made than that.] > I would phrase your principle a different way: it's important to be > able to look past the superficial into the real person before judging > them. Harry hasn't yet learned this lesson; it's still rather scary > how he handed over the map to Fake!Moody in GOF largely on the basis > of an apparent mutual distaste for Snape. I don't disagree that it's important not to be fooled, and not to fall for the superficial. Harry and others surely need to learn that distinction. What I would disagree on is the (perhaps implied--correct me if I am wrong) labeling of everyday behavior as belonging to the superficial. It matters what one does in the grand scheme of things, but you can't completely separate that out from the everyday actions taken. It's not like anyone operates on a strict split of everyday actions as opposed to Big Important War Actions. OotP showed that the two things can't be separated that neatly, if at all, particularly when it comes to issues like trust, communication, and interaction. -Nora thinks that intent is probably an important part of JKR's horizon, too From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Mon Apr 11 00:40:51 2005 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:40:51 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry Potter Personality Type (Was: Re: Narcissistic!Snape...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <75b9fab8620785b198c3437167063121@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127399 On Apr 9, 2005, at 2:24 PM, cubfanbudwoman wrote: > > ...Some further info, which may be of interest.? My comments can be > found within [ ]. > > From? http://www.ptypes.com/narcissisticpd.html : This site was interesting. I was looking at the various links on this site and found a link for "Noteworthy Examples" for the various personality types. And to my surprise, I found an entry "Harry Potter"--under "H" for Harry rather than a "P" for Potter. (??) They have Harry categorized as Inventive Personality Type. The Inventive type corresponds to Kersey/ Myer-Briggs type ENTP. See http://www.ptypes.com/inventive.html. This is almost the opposite of the Piratemonkey labeling of Harry as ISFP, and much of the fairly recent speculation on this list, yet the PTypes evaluation makes a lot of sense to me. Barbara Roberts [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 01:35:20 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 01:35:20 -0000 Subject: Opinions (was Harry's Motivation) (was Re: JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section In-Reply-To: <20050409171049.49270.qmail@web53905.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127400 Lynn: I'm more like Lupinlore so here is my take on it. I invest emotionally and if I'm not satisfied emotionally then I feel as if I lost my economic investment. It's one reason I don't go to the theatre to see movies much anymore. I hate spending all that money to come out feeling disappointed. Does that mean it has to end the way I want it too? No but it has to end in a way that satisfies me emotionally. Alla: Oh, OK, now it makes more sense for me I think - thanks for writing it. So, basically the CONCRETE result you expect from the works of fiction, including Potter series - is the satisfactory ending, right? I think that "aesthetical" and "economical" approaches are often connected though. "The satisfactory ending" means that the ending will please your senses or satisfy your intellectual curiousity, or both, right? You cannot measure satisfaction in more definite quantities than that, correct? I also invest emotionally in the books I like and I definitely won't be happy if we get the ending, where... say Harry dies or loses his magic ( which IS even worse, IMO). Now, the result of my unhappiness will probably be the fact that I won't reread the books again. Maybe, I don't know. As JKR's daughter said ... as long as it is not Harry, who dies. :-) Anyways, even if I won't reread the books again, I won't call them bad stories, because the experience I had was very enjoyable so far in first four books and enjoyable with large reservations in the book five. As Potioncat said - I've got my money worth already, because I had a very enjoyable ride so far and I will treasure those moments. :-) Lynn: Obviously, with the HP series, I've had to invest economically even though I don't know if the ending will disappoint. But, like Lupinlore, if the ending does not satisfy, any future books by JK Rowlings won't be bought until I'm satisfied it's an ending that doesn't disappoint. Alla: OK, I got it, I think. No, I don't think that I cam measure books artistic value based on how it ends only. Again, thanks for the explanation of your POV. JMO of course, Alla. From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 01:45:03 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 01:45:03 -0000 Subject: Post Traumatic Stress and Snape was Re: Narcissistic!Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127401 > Nora: > I don't think it is. I think it takes a particular temperament, > character, set of mind to look at a child from having known his > father at school and go "Opp, just like the old man, he is", and > then proceed to behave that way in the face of all evidence. > Alla: > > I am afraid I really don't follow you, Pippin. :-) I would > definitely NOT have thought that Draco is exactly as his father from > the FIRST moment we saw him. We were specifically talking about the > fact that Snape seems to classify Harry as James on their FIRST > meeting, right? I absolutely don't see the similarities. If Snape > would start to think about Harry as his father ... say couple years > after he started Hogwarts, whether it was deserved or not, it would > be a different story. > > Snape though makes a snap judgment, or seems to make a snap judgment > about Harry the moment he sees the boy. > > Yeah, I'd say I DEFINITELY expect Snape to show more discernment > than that, or actually now I don't since I am quite convinced by > Narcissistic! Snape argument. > Kid who, in Snape opinion thinks that he is so special,as Susan so > eloquently put it, definitely needs to be taken down. :-) Kemper now: Maybe Snape suffers from a mild case of Post-Traumatic Stress. People who were abused sometimes have unreasonable reactions to those who look like the one who abused them. And everyone on this list knows Harry looks like James, except in the eyes. He has his mother's eyes. But what if Harry was Harriet, the girl who lived? Would Snape have such a strong, unhealthy, reaction to her? I don't think so because Harriet is a girl and even though Harriet could look like her James in almost every way, she would still fall short when it comes to the Y chromosome. A girl didn't attack Snape, a boy did. The boy who attacked Snape, looks almost exactly like Harry. This doesn't make Snape's reaction to Harry acceptable, but it does make it understandable. Snape has issues. Kemper From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Apr 11 02:06:17 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 02:06:17 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127402 > Pippin: > Why do you say Snape was in complete control? He wasn't -- he got > knocked out! Nora: He wouldn't have gotten knocked out if he had shut up and listened and not pushed it. :) [It's only after he really starts *raving* that HRH knock him out, after all. Is it interesting that his raving is of the "You idiot you should be thanking *me* variety? I find it to be so.] Pippin: The point is, if Harry, Ron and Hermione were being controlled, they could have attacked Snape and overpowered him at any time. And Snape had no way of knowing whether they were or not. One of them might even have been possessed. Nora: No, really. Maybe I'm just being forgetful, but I don't remember any broad presentation of DEs doing scary things sans wands, although I haven't re-read the battle scene in OotP in a while. Snape is able to control the cords he summons without a wand, but wandless magic is more of a fanon creation than a known quantity. Pippin: It's not fanon that Quirrell "raised his hand to perform a deadly curse" in PS/SS. He also orders Harry about and Harry obeys without question at least at first. Nora: The narcissism aspect does speak to some of the insecurities and behavioral peculiarities that he seems to evince. Pippin: But there are many conditions that make for peculiar people. I was reading today about Asperger's Syndrome (a form of autism). 'They tend not to understand facial expressions, body language and other non-verbalcommunications, and thus take statements literally, missing implied meanings and subtexts. They often lack empathy, blurting out truthful but unvarnished statements. Once set in a course of action, they are slow to process new information that suggests they should change what they are doing. And they typically fixate on very specific interests." Some of that sounds eerily like Snape and some of it doesn't. I don't think Snape was created with one hand on the keyboard and the other in an abnormal psychology text book. I think he's a composite of several "difficult" people that JKR has known or observed in real life. IMO, he's there so that Harry can learn how to deal with difficult people, just as JKR (Dumbledore) implied, IMO, Harry needs to learn about going the extra mile, and he also needs to learn that not everyone who's easy to get along with means well. Pippin From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 02:20:39 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 02:20:39 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter Personality Type (Was: Re: Narcissistic!Snape...) In-Reply-To: <75b9fab8620785b198c3437167063121@bellsouth.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127403 Here is another site. Probably not done by a professional, but interesting. You compare your type to different personalities in the Harry Potter books. http://piratemonkeysinc.com/quiz.htm ;-) according to this one I am Albus Dumbledore! This makes me very happy, since he is my favorite. ;-) Actually I have taken the long version and I am an INFP. My P/J score is very nearly the same, so sometimes I am a P and sometimes a J. Now I have not quite desided what type Harry actually is. And we have all had this discussion before. Snape is an INTJ I think. Tonks_op From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Apr 11 02:40:26 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 02:40:26 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127404 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Some of that sounds eerily like Snape and some of it doesn't. > I don't think Snape was created with one hand on the keyboard and > the other in an abnormal psychology text book. I certainly agree witht that. However, I wouldn't be too sure that JKR doesn't have some pretty specific mental/spiritual faults in mind when she crafted Snape. I think he's a > composite of several "difficult" people that JKR has known or > observed in real life. That is very likely. But I also think Snape, like all the other characters, has "taken a life of his own" and grown through the series, perhaps in ways JKR did not quite foresee. I also agree with Nora that JKR's vision of Snape, and the vision popular in the fandom, may well be pretty divergent. IMO, he's there so that Harry can learn how to > deal with difficult people, just as JKR (Dumbledore) implied, > IMO, Harry needs to learn about going the extra mile, and he also > needs to learn that not everyone who's easy to get along with > means well. Well, now we are dealing with preferences so fundamental they can fairly be called part of bedrock personality. Some people would find such a theme interesting and enjoyable. More power to them, it is certainly their right. Others, like me, would find it revolting, not to mention insipid beyond belief and indeed frankly nauseating. But, at this point, it's almost as basic of a difference as whether your eyes are brown or blue. Lupinlore, who is looking forward eagerly to seeing Snape get his much-deserved, and hopefully extremely painful, karmic payback. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 02:56:08 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 02:56:08 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127405 >>Nora: >Okay; from Snape's perspective, James is a direct participant. From Snape's perspective, it seems that everything done to him is due to be paid back in full to the next generation, as well.< Betsy: I would say Snape would prefer to see his attempted murderers punished, yes. Generally, the desire for justice is a fairly common human trait. Not sure what you mean about "next generation". Snape worries that Harry may share some of his father's less than desirable traits. I haven't seen anything suggesting Snape thinks Harry should pay for his father's sins. (If that was the case, I'd think a long drop from a bucking broom would have served nicely.) >>Nora: >But let's not go further into talking about the Prank, because I don't buy your scenario or anyone else's at the moment. All are equally unlikely from the current perspective.< Betsy: I'm afraid the Prank is too important to Snape to so easily dismiss. Especially when talking *about* Snape. I'm also curious as to how you can judge my scenario of the Prank when I've never actually shared it. I was talking about how *Snape* perceived it. I doubt he has the correct view on it (the players rarely do, caught up in their own perspective as they are), but since his view of the Prank colors how he thinks about James (and Sirius, but James was the relevant part of my post) to throw it out would be equivilant of trying to discuss Harry's view of Voldemort without once mentioning GH. >>Betsy: >Yeah, I was waiting for someone to equate being dangled upside down, genitalia on display for a mixed crowd to laugh at (if James went through with his threat, of course) with getting pantsed. I think it's the length of time involved in the display that pushes it over the edge of school-boy antics into aggressive, sexual humiliaton, IMO. (If Death Eaters think it's good enough for Muggle torture, after all...)< >>Nora: >Of course, we have no idea what happened next, to be pedantically insistent upon textual support; what is implied by the lack of continuation is a blank to be filled by any reader. Parallels and differences.< Betsy: What the text tells us is that James and Sirius treat Snape to the same kind of sexual humiliation that the Death Eaters treated the Muggle woman to in GoF. The text tells us that James threatened to take things a step further into a realm I would catagorize as *aggressive*, sexual humiliation. And the text tells us (as Pippin has already pointed out) that after seeing this scene Harry thought his father capable of rape. I don't think JKR is pulling her punches here. >>Nora: >I'm unconvinced of the assertion that 'Master' is a title alluding to extra schooling; it could be (although we know there are no wizarding universities, which doesn't leave out personal tutelage, but there's another blank for you), it could be standard, or it could be Snape's fussiness. But as a joking aside, JKR does set up a Snape who comes into the DADA classroom with disparaging remarks about another teacher, and then proceeds to make at least one mistake, and one pointed out by the hand of the author elsewhere. Seems a slight general puncturing of ego, IMO.< Betsy: And that proves my point. JKR is *quite* capable of pointing out "fussiness" as you call it, and making fun of it. Since she has never done it regarding Snape's title of Potions Master, I'm quite confident his title is legitimate. *How* he got the title is, of course, a matter of speculation. It could very well be that anyone teaching Potions is called Potions Master. But it does nothing to suggest Snape's ego, inflated or otherwise. >>Nora: >I think Harry learned Potions by working through it in class and out, but I think he managed to learn things despite the personally- targeted hostile treatment he received. The kind of obstacles Snape throws out and the kind of struggling with them involved is not the good kind of struggling with problems, it's the kind where you have to get through the mess to learn anything at all.< Betsy: I disagree with you here. Snape's snarkiness in the classroom is generally a high demand for precision and understanding that can only be met by doing the homework and reading he assigns, and following the instructions he gives to the letter. I imagine potions are pretty demanding as to how, what, and when things are added. Snape's high expectations are necessary. His demeanor encourages the students to do as he says. It won't make him any friends, but it does give his students a high pass rate on the OWLs. Proof is in the pudding, wouldn't you say? >>Nora: >Harry finds it so much easier when Snape isn't there--think of everything he could have absorbed more quickly without overt hostility in the classroom. It's much easier to learn when you don't have to worry about being singled out for special treatment.< Betsy: Harry didn't find it easier to *learn*, he found it easier to *perform*. He was taking a test, not learning a lesson. And the fact that Harry was comfortable within the test-taking environment also speaks to Snape being a good teacher. His students can perform under pressure. >>Nora: >The curiosity wasn't present from the very beginning of the Occlumency lessons, but lessons founded on a more solid ground (per my own model, perhaps) might have done something. YMMV.< Betsy: Here's the first time Harry had the dream: "He reached the black door but could not open it.... He stood gazing at it, desperate for entry.... 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...." (OotP Scholastic hardback ed. pp. 496-497) The curiosity is cleverly placed there by Voldemort, I presume. But I think lack of information (Dumbledore's fault) feeds it. Lupin would have been nicer, and Harry would have felt a bit more guilty (maybe) about keeping at the dreams. But he would have kept at them. IMO, of course. >>Nora: >I never said it's that he wasn't really bothered. I said that his reaction to them makes sense with some of the aspects. It's bad enough that Fudge is calling Snape unhinged, and Snape has also gone around Dumbledore to try to get his way. Betsy: But wouldn't going around Dumbledore negate the "craving for validation" part of NPD? :) >>Nora: >It's the way that Black's escape is regarded as an utterly personal affront; it's more about what Black has done in the *past* to Snape than any conception of present guilt, etc.< Betsy: That's my entire point. It *is* personal. Very personal. Snape and Black have a relationship that goes back years, none of it good. It effects Black just as strongly. Sirius disobeyed Dumbledore and sabatoged the Occlumency lessons because of his hatred of Snape. >>Nora: >So here's a question for you: why does Dumbledore hang Snape out to dry in the way that he does?< Betsy I assume you're talking about the end of PoA. I didn't see Dumbledore hanging Snape out to dry. I did see him gently pulling Snape back under control. The fact the Snape still holds Dumbledore in high regard in GoF, and that Dumbledore still considers Snape a strong ally in his fight against Voldemort suggests that neither men considered Dumbledore's comments a betrayal. >>Nora: >...[Snape's] inability or unwillingness to rethink positions when faced with new evidence...< >>Betsy: >Erm... So we'll just ignore that whole switching sides against his friends and his upbringing thing, then?< >>Nora: >That is important. However, we have absolutely no evidence as to motivation or what was involved here, so we have to plug it as a blank.< Betsy: But it doesn't matter what Snape's motivations were. You were arguing that once Snape picked a position he stuck with it. And we have canonical evidence that he *can* and *has* changed positions. Fairly dramatically. The whys and wherefores are unimportant here. >>Nora: >...his general arrogance and self-confidence in his own opinions...< >Betsy: >And I see we're also ignoring the whole Occlumency thing...< >>Nora: >Of course, one could argue that Snape is only doing his duty as a Professor of the school, to take care of a student and do these niggling little things that Dumbledore, the man who saved him from trial as a DE, asks him to.< Betsy: But even in "only doing his duty" Snape is doing something he doesn't wish to, because Dumbledore has told him it's important. That suggests that Snape *will* do something that in his own opinion is a waste of time. >>Nora: >In the Shrieking Shack, a lot of Snape's rhetoric is oriented towards "I done got you, Sirius Black, and you done me wrong". Snape gets so worked up that he seems to forget that it's not about what happened in the past ala schooldays, it's what happened ala traitors/etc. that should matter in that situation--and he won't even listen.< Betsy: Why would he listen to two traitors and liars, and three children who could have easily been Confounded? And why is it so odd that Snape is thrilled to catch Sirius? This is a man who almost killed him. Of course he's thrilled. And it's not like there was big mystery surrounding Sirius as far as the WW is concerned. He was an escaped convict, why would Snape think there was a question to be answered? >>Nora: >You can put the things together, really. Snape has a personal history. Why on earth does he react to events from it with such intense fervor? Some aspects of the personality diagnosis illuminate patterns in his reactions, particularly the intensity of them and their resistance to more logical processing.< Betsy: What "resistance to more logical processing"? It's perfectly logical for a man to resent those who made his childhood so very painful and nearly killed him. What I find illogical is the surprise at Snape's intense hatred of the Marauders. From everything JKR has shown us, Snape is perfectly justified in his feelings. That's part of the reason I question the NPD label. Snape's reactions make sense *without* the label. In order for the NPD idea to stick, show me Snape reacting in the same manner to those he *doesn't* share a personal history with. >>Nora: >There is a leap which has to be made to look at the child of someone (who you know is an orphan; it's open to debate what Snape knew/knows about Harry's life otherwise) and go "His daddy done me wrong; I'll learn that boy good".< Betsy: It's a leap, I for one, do not make. I do not think Snape sees Harry as an opportunity to take vengence on James' wrongs. I *do* think Snape worries that Harry will be filled with the same overblown arrogance and self-centeredness that did James in. There's a profound difference. >>Nora: >There's a particular override of personal issues over institutional (and other) duties that would lead one to the kind of madness shown in the Shrieking Shack...< Betsy: It's exactly this kind of unrealistic demand that I just cannot comprehend. You expect Snape to be at his most logical and reasonable when confronting some of the worst demons of his past, in a place he very nearly died. I think you expect to much. >>Nora: >...and then flares into a screaming hissy-fit at the moment of disappointment...< Betsy: "Yes, Snape, your attempted murderer just escaped. Again. Do stop sulking." I just can't fathom it. I suppose you think Harry drasically overreacted to Cedric's death and the whole graveyard scene in GoF? I mean, how dare he fall apart so badly in OotP. Maybe Harry has a personality disorder? He *does* scream a lot. :) Betsy From kempermentor at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 03:03:40 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 03:03:40 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127406 >>Jim Ferer: > > >Personality disorders are only labels anyway, useful descriptors of observed patterns.< > > Betsy: > Are they? I was under the impression that a personality disorder is > a disease, a chemical imbalance in the brain that can only be helped > with proper medication. Unlike, say introversion, which is more a > personality trait, someone suffering from a personality disorder has > no control over their reactions to certain stimuli. >If it turns out that Snape has a mental disease, doesn't > that negate all the background information JKR has been feeding out > to us in such delicious drips and drabs? Because if Snape is really > suffering from NPD, it doesn't matter if he was the class victim or > the class bully or the class golden boy. All of his reactions to the > various plot twists encountered throughout the books would be because > of a chemical imbalance. Rather boring denouement, IMO. Kemper stepping into the fire: Betsy, you may be confusing Mood and Psychotic Disorders with Personality Disorders. Mood and Psychotic Dxs are generally chemical imbalances. Personality dxs are not. You are born with a mood or psychotic dx. You are raised a personality dx. Effed up Nature versus effed up Nurture. Except for Obsessive/Compulsive Dx, there is pretty much no medication for a Personality Disorder, only therapy and a desire to do something different in life. They have the choice and control to make that happen. You are right: Snape doesn't have a dx. But he does seem to have traits of a Narcisistic Personality. His reactions to the various plot twists encountered throughout the books would not be excused by chemical imbalances because personality dxs don't have chemical imbalances. Cut and paste the address below for a little more info on narcissism http://www.healthyplace.com/communities/personality_disorders/narcissi sm/faq70.html Kemper, who advises those interacting with personality dxs to set firm limits and who appologizes if this is a bit off-topic From nrenka at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 03:27:53 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 03:27:53 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127407 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > Betsy: > I'm afraid the Prank is too important to Snape to so easily > dismiss. Especially when talking *about* Snape. I'm also curious > as to how you can judge my scenario of the Prank when I've never > actually shared it. I don't buy *any* possible scenario for the Prank. There's too much information missing in the accounts given to make anything make sense. I've been here for a while (where's my rocker?), and think I have seen almost every single possible possibility banded around. One or more of them is likely right in some aspect or another, but there is absolutely no way to choose from them at the moment. The 'unknown unknowns' are another potential factor screwing with us. Only the exposition fairy can solve this quandry. >> Nora: >> Of course, we have no idea what happened next, to be pedantically >> insistent upon textual support; what is implied by the lack of >> continuation is a blank to be filled by any reader. Parallels and >> differences. > > Betsy: > What the text tells us is that James and Sirius treat Snape to the > same kind of sexual humiliation that the Death Eaters treated the > Muggle woman to in GoF. The text tells us that James threatened to > take things a step further into a realm I would catagorize as > *aggressive*, sexual humiliation. And the text tells us (as Pippin > has already pointed out) that after seeing this scene Harry thought > his father capable of rape. I don't think JKR is pulling her > punches here. With the one difference being, of course, that unlike a helpless Muggle woman, Snape has some small degree of success at fighting back. The text does not tell us to what extent it's taken--that was the basis of my objection. We don't know what happens next. I suspect we shall agree to disagree about the connotations of Harry's musings; it strikes me as less a pondering of rape and more "she ever liked him at all...but they got together...". YMMV. > Betsy: > And that proves my point. JKR is *quite* capable of pointing > out "fussiness" as you call it, and making fun of it. Since she > has never done it regarding Snape's title of Potions Master, I'm > quite confident his title is legitimate. *How* he got the title > is, of course, a matter of speculation. It could very well be that > anyone teaching Potions is called Potions Master. But it does > nothing to suggest Snape's ego, inflated or otherwise. I won't quibble that point (I don't think I did in the first place, really). I will insist that the puncturing of his ego regarding the DADA position is rather deliberate, though. > Betsy: > Harry didn't find it easier to *learn*, he found it easier to > *perform*. He was taking a test, not learning a lesson. And the > fact that Harry was comfortable within the test-taking environment > also speaks to Snape being a good teacher. His students can > perform under pressure. I am disinclined to make such a strong distinction between learning and performance, in this case. I think it's probable that Harry could have learned more (certainly in Occlumency, if not in Potions) with a more amenable teacher. Demand for precision does not require a 'snarky' temperament. >> Nora: >> I never said it's that he wasn't really bothered. I said that his >> reaction to them makes sense with some of the aspects. It's bad >> enough that Fudge is calling Snape unhinged, and Snape has also >> gone around Dumbledore to try to get his way. > > Betsy: > But wouldn't going around Dumbledore negate the "craving for > validation" part of NPD? :) There was a fascinating thread, I forget where, explaining Snape's actions as a kind of twisted attempt to support Dumbledore. In this scenario, Snape considers that Dumbledore has, in his soft-hearted tendencies towards mercy, let himself be fooled; Snape will then work it out as it *should* go, and Dumbledore will come around to see how right Snape was in the long run, and how wrong he was to think of valuing that disgusting Black above his devoted Snape. It's an idea. > Betsy: > > That's my entire point. It *is* personal. Very personal. Snape > and Black have a relationship that goes back years, none of it > good. It effects Black just as strongly. Sirius disobeyed > Dumbledore and sabatoged the Occlumency lessons because of his > hatred of Snape. I don't see some well-intentioned if unproductive comments as direct 'sabotage', being as Sirius couldn't actually *do* anything regarding the lessons. Are you putting it forward that without Sirius' comments, Harry would have been a model student and automatically trusted in Snape just because he was told, regardless of their past history and the general way that Snape treats him? I don't think Harry would have trusted more in Snape without Sirius' comments. Trust is something built between people over a period of interactions and depends on everyday behavior just as much as the Big Things. Harry in particular functions with trust more along the lines of Ron's objections to Snape; he is not really content to take someone else's word for it, but needs personal knowledge. Harry is not Dumbledore, after all; he does not have the ability or luxury to be able to deal with things the same way. >> Nora: >> So here's a question for you: why does Dumbledore hang Snape out >> to dry in the way that he does? > > Betsy > I assume you're talking about the end of PoA. I didn't see > Dumbledore hanging Snape out to dry. I did see him gently pulling > Snape back under control. The fact the Snape still holds > Dumbledore in high regard in GoF, and that Dumbledore still > considers Snape a strong ally in his fight against Voldemort > suggests that neither men considered Dumbledore's comments a > betrayal. Dumbledore lets Snape vent and scream and generally make a public fool of himself. It may well have been explained later. You might be interested to know that some fans out there in the ether read Dumbledore's actions as an extremely cruel betrayal of the loyal Snape, who has no reason to remain loyal to the mean bastard. > Betsy: > But it doesn't matter what Snape's motivations were. You were > arguing that once Snape picked a position he stuck with it. And we > have canonical evidence that he *can* and *has* changed positions. > Fairly dramatically. The whys and wherefores are unimportant here. The whys are extremely important. We could have something like Kneasy's revenge scenario, where Snape switches because his own self- interest (wife'n'kids) has been wildly violated. We could have another variation of the self-interest scenario, possibly involving something with Snape's own person. We could have the BANG-y sudden shock situation, whereby one dramatic event overwhelms Snape and causes a change of alliance, but the underlying way that Snape sees the world remains fundamentally the same. (That is certainly not unknown--big events change the way that people behave towards some things, but leave the rest of their thought patterns the same.) George or Diana becoming canon would knock serious holes in this diagnosis, because each depends on a profound level of introspection. There are other options which do not. > Betsy: > It's a leap, I for one, do not make. I do not think Snape sees > Harry as an opportunity to take vengence on James' wrongs. I *do* > think Snape worries that Harry will be filled with the same > overblown arrogance and self-centeredness that did James in. > There's a profound difference. There is a statement oft repeated by me: when you assume, you make an ass out of you and me. It still strikes me as suiting Snape's position towards Harry perfectly. He assumed from the beginning, and wonder if that doesn't help make it true. From my experiences in the classroom, it's always nice to wait and see how people behave and not try to bait or goad them before deciding what kind of student and/or person they are. > Betsy: > It's exactly this kind of unrealistic demand that I just cannot > comprehend. You expect Snape to be at his most logical and > reasonable when confronting some of the worst demons of his past, > in a place he very nearly died. I think you expect to much. I expect enough out of Snape that given the profound trust Dumbledore seems to rest in him, he has the ability to distinguish between his own personal investment in an issue and the responsibility to things like actuality and justice. I do expect that a more mature person would be able to distinguish between punishment for a crime in the past and punishment for a different crime, although Snape may well subscribe to the "I don't care if he's guilty of what is charged, he should die anyway" school of thought. I find it absolutely overpoweringly ironic that Snape is furious at Dumbledore for believing Black's story, when Snape himself is on a second chance (and has most likely done worse things in the past than Black ever did; having been a DE at all is a minimum of aiding and abetting to murder). Of course, if you agree with Pippin's sadism argument, you have a reason for why he starts threatening Lupin and Black so profoundly--he really likes to see them squirm, he enjoys their emotional distress. > Betsy: > "Yes, Snape, your attempted murderer just escaped. Again. Do stop > sulking." I just can't fathom it. One would think that Snape has the ability to distinguish between guilt for one crime and for another...but maybe I'm giving him way too much credit and putting him too high on the ethical totem pole. Maybe he is just a poor damaged soul who really can't help it, so traumatized by his past and unable to get past it. I wouldn't hold him to high moral standards if Dumbledore didn't keep telling Harry (and thus us) to trust in him, after all. -Nora notes that Faith seems to be eyeing the skies with interest these days From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 03:38:37 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 03:38:37 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127408 >>Kemper stepping into the fire: >Betsy, you may be confusing Mood and Psychotic Disorders with Personality Disorders. Mood and Psychotic Dxs are generally chemical imbalances. Personality dxs are not. You are born with a mood or psychotic dx. You are raised a personality dx. Effed up Nature versus effed up Nurture.< Betsy: Thanks, Kemper, for clarifying this for me. I can more easily accept effed up Nurture!Snape than effed up Nature!Snape. In this case, Nurture is much more interesting. (Still not completely onboard the NPD train, though. *g*) Betsy From vmonte at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 03:50:32 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 03:50:32 -0000 Subject: JKR's site Rumours Section/DD Immortal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127409 Chys, I disagree that DD is immortal -in that way- for his ideal, or the spirit behind his character can never die- But I suppose he can be immortal if he's like the phoenix, but he would have to die and be reborn if he were and that would be a problem seeing as if he were reborn as an infant like Fawkes seems to be a chick again, then there'd be no way he could help Harry in the end; thus the classic Hero confrontation for LV and Harry would ensue on schedule. Yeah. I think that's the way to go. What could he come up with that's more elegant, eh? The final confrontation- Chys' style *hides the few remaining braincells*: HP: *shoots random magic from his wand* LV: *gasps and shrinks* DD: *stumbles onto the scene* What happened?! HP: *holds up a twitching frog* Uhm, his name's Tom, can I keep him? DD: O.o;; vmonte responds: Maybe a bell jar will break over his head at the DoM at the end of book 7, turning him back into baby DD. vmonte - I'm kidding! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/snitch-/ From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 11 04:51:43 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 04:51:43 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127410 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dysis" wrote: >snip > The Ministry uses special magic to detect when an underage wizard > has done magic. Yet, we see a teenager doing magic in his own > bedroom without any qualms. Does he know some sort of spell that > shields him from the special magic that the Ministry uses to detect > underage magic? But what bothers me even more is that the Ministry > doesn't have a special detector of the Unforgivable Curses in > general, and not just by underage wizards. Why can the Ministry > detect Underage Wizardry, which isn't more than a felony, when it > can't detect Unforgivable Curses? Magic is magic, isn't it? snip > dysisgirl imamommy: I can think of a couple of possibilities. The first is the Hogwarts protections; if Snape was in his room he may have been beyond any sort of detection, just as, apparently was Crouch!Moody when he performed the curses. However, how is it that the ministry never detects when VM or Wormtail use the curses (ie Bertha Jorkins, Crouch SR., Frank Bryce)? Another is simply free agency; these curses are illegal, but we are not going to invade peoples privacy by tracking what magic they can perform. This reminds me of present-day efforts to fight terrorism. Many people in the US want the government to wage war on terrorism using whatever means necessary, until and unless it infringes on their privacy. So people got annoyed with increased security checks at airports, and they definitely don't want the government reading their email, the arguement being that if we stop living free the terrorists have already won. I'm not saying where the balance should be, but I do think it needs to be a balance between safety and freedom to choose. But I think the wizarding world is a lot like real life, and it may be that to detect unforgivables the MoM would have to track a lot of other spells that people think are their own business. Also, detectors seem to have only a vague degree of accuracy. When Harry is disciplined for the violet pudding incident, for example, the MoM can only pinpoint that it happened at his house. They can't actually say with certainty who did it, or they would have known it was Dobby. This is further evidenced by the Weasleys; I think F&G have been cooking stuff up in their bedroom for a while, and they definitely jinx the "Bighead Boy" badge while at the Leaky Cauldron before term has started, and it seems I also remember Ginny performing cleaning spells prior to boarding the Hogwarts express. So it wouldn't seem that wizarding children have quite the same expectations in this regard as those who live with muggles. Another thought that came to mind is, IIRC, I think the curses are Unforgivable only if used *against another human.* So while I hope there are severe punishments against those using them against animals, hitting a fly or a spider with one may not be enough to warrant any sort of action, even if you were detected. Those are my thoughts. imamommy From tinglinger at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 04:51:44 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 04:51:44 -0000 Subject: Man the canons - the rant on Snape's Pants In-Reply-To: <20050410135847.20197.qmail@web20021.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127411 Rebecca Stephens [James and Sirius] even said the reason they harassed Snape was that "he exists" and Lily said they hexed anyone who annoyed them. Then, after Lily left they hung him upside down in the air and James says "Who wants to see me take off Snivelly's pants?" Then the memory cuts off. I don't think there is any indication they left Snape alone after that. tinglinger The memory in the pensieve was cut off because Snape caught Harry observing his shame. If there was more of Snape to expose, the Snively One would have had no reason to terminate the memory after James' question and leave the rest dangling in his mind to be Legillimens by Harry. If Snape was able to avoid further embarassment, he would leave the whole scene in the memory as a moral victory to lessen the satisfaction of the prying mind of his oppressors. With all due apologies to Dennis Miller, I already know more than I ever wanted to know about Snape's pants, regardless of whether they were removed or not. In fact, unless Snape is a eunuch, whether his shortcomings were exposed or not really isn't too material to the story. That said, does anyone have any ideas what would happen if Snape's memory as stored in the pensieve somehow ended and Harry was still inside? Would Harry have been able to get out on his own? In the two instances where Harry "fell into" the ensieve, he was "pulled out" before the memories were complete. Just curious.... tinglinger who moderates the yahoo group called potterplots for presentation and discussion of plot twists and predictions for books 6 and 7. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From tinglinger at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 05:38:12 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 05:38:12 -0000 Subject: JKR's site - where the REAL clues are ....... {imho} In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127412 mhbobbin: Of course, the story stands on its own, with its own twists. But JKR has deliberately chosen to follow the storyline of classic Hero mythology, as did the original Star Wars and Lord of the Rings. She will have her own twists and she could still have everyone alive at the end but I am with those who think DD will be done at the end of Book Six. tinglinger: I am always amazed that many potterfans never bothered to peruse the books on the bookshelf in JKR's "library" ( on the Links page of her website --- click on the pen ), where I have not seen Star Wars or Lord of the Rings, or even a stray balrog in evidence. Rather, I see the works of Jane Austen, "I Capture the Castle", and "The Little White Horse" by Elizabeth Goudge, among others. If you wanted to have the slightest chance at predicting the future course of the Potterverse, you would have to have at least a passing knowledge of the storylines and characters of as many of the books in her library as you can get your hands on. ALthough there may be elements of classic Hero mythology in the series (there is a book on World Mytholigy on the top visible shelf), the real clues imho are hidden in the specific identifiable titles sitting there in plain sight. Many of these books are her favorites and have common themes running through them, and can be seen in what JKR has written so far. I have learned more about how the series will probably develop in books 6 and 7 from reading The Little White Horse than from all the comments on all the Harry Potter fansites combined. It won't be long now till we know for sure ...... tinglinger who moderates the yahoo group called potterplots for presentation of plot twists and predictions for books 6 and 7. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 10:23:51 2005 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 10:23:51 -0000 Subject: Man the canons - the rant on Snape's Pants In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127413 > Rebecca Stephens > [James and Sirius] even said the reason they harassed > Snape was that "he exists" and Lily said they hexed > anyone who annoyed them. > Then, after Lily left they hung him upside down in the > air and James says "Who wants to see me take off > Snivelly's pants?" Then the memory cuts off. I don't > think there is any indication they left Snape alone > after that. > > tinglinger > The memory in the pensieve was cut off because Snape > caught Harry observing his shame. If there was more > of Snape to expose, the Snively One would have had no > reason to terminate the memory after James' question > and leave the rest dangling in his mind to be > Legillimens by Harry. If Snape was able to avoid > further embarassment, he would leave the whole scene > in the memory as a moral victory to lessen the > satisfaction of the prying mind of his oppressors. > Tammy: I think the only way it could have ended with a moral victory is if Snape had found a way to stop it by himself. If he ended up rescued by anyone, teacher or otherwise (which is the more likely ending if he wasn't pantsed), it would serve as further humiliation in his mind. It would have meant that he couldn't handle things himself. He seems to be the kind of guy who prizes self-sufficiency. From deeblegirl at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 00:21:30 2005 From: deeblegirl at yahoo.com (deeblegirl) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 00:21:30 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127414 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dysis" wrote: > Assuming > that it is Snape, and that he is using the Killing Curse as a > teenager, we have to wonder (1) where he learned it, (2) how > powerful he must have been, and (3) why was a teenage kid using an > Unforgivable Curse when he knew full well that the Ministry had and > Underage Wizarding Policy. I suspect that the underage wizarding detection charm (assuming it is a charm) can only detect the use of magic, not the age of the user -- which means it's only good for monitoring Muggle-born students. Any young witch or wizard living with parents who are also magical would be able to get away with a lot at home. Think Fred and George ... (... and, of course, of the fact that Harry was blamed for Dobby's magic in "Chamber of Secrets.") Deeble, who hopes this moderated post appears before a dozen other people say the same thing From elfundeb at gmail.com Mon Apr 11 13:19:14 2005 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 09:19:14 -0400 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender Message-ID: <80f25c3a05041106197d4bfbaf@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127415 A week late and a topic short -- just gender, not race. Many apologies. First, Dr. Nel's original question: "When asked why her central character is male, Rowling replied that, having imagined Harry as the hero, she could not easily change him into Harriet Potter. She has also said, 'Hermione is such a good friend . . . that I don't feel I have shortchanged girls!' (JKR chat transcript). However, Donna Harrington-Lueker faults the books for 'subtle sexism,' maintaining that 'none of the girls or women in GoF escapes shrillness, giddiness or fear.' Hermione is 'bossy, shrill, exasperating and meddlesome,' 'the stereotypical good girl who completes her work ahead of time, chides her friends fro breaking rules and always has her hand up in class.' Christine Schoefer writes, 'Girls, when they are not downright silly or unlikeable, are helpers, enablers and instruments.' Of the professors, Minerva McGonagall is 'stern,' overly 'bound by' rules, and too emotional in a crisis: Sybill Trelawney is 'a misty, dreamy, dewy charlatan.' Do you agree with these analyses? Do the HP novels uphold stereotypical gender roles? Why or why not? What would the books be like if Hermione was the central character instead of Harry?" Reading through past posts, the list members have overwhelmingly concluded that the articles Dr. Nel cites represent an extreme position, and virtually no one has endorsed that view. That doesn't mean that the topic hasn't been contentious, however, or that readers have generally been happy with JKR's depiction of female characters. Additional questions: 1. It has been said many times on this list that JKR skillfully uses stereotypes in creating her secondary characters. Does her use of stereotypes undercut her assertion of gender equality? To what extent do her main female characters conform to or transcend the stereotype? 2. Hermione has been criticized on this list for sometimes melting in a crisis, but since OOP a more common criticism has been that she was too successful to be believable. What do you think of Hermione's character? Has JKR succeeded in drawing a strong yet believable character? Are there other examples of strong female characters? What about her female characters in traditional roles? 3. JKR stated in an interview, "Although it is true that you do have a headmaster as opposed to a headmistress, but that has not always been the case. As you will find out, there have been equal numbers of headmistresses." http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-cbc-rogers.htm QTTA and FBAWTFT also mention women ministers of magic going back to the 14th century. Do you think the books themselves convey the same impression of equal representation in education? In government? 4. Do you believe the books are male-centered? Could she have made the books less male-centered without sacrificing the story? Is this important to female readers? To male readers? Should it be? The topic of gender has resurfaced at regular intervals over the years. Here are some links. There are *many* more good posts than the ones referenced here. It's quite worthwhile to delve further into some of these threads. Initial thread discussing the Salon article begins here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives/message/369 Susan McGee on JKR's male identification and its impact on the female characters http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/3466 Amy Z summarizes a discussion of strong females in HP http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/14852 And Scott does the same http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/15146 Elizabeth Dalton on disappointing female characters http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/33134 David ponders The Sleeping Woman in HP http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/37446 Porphyria on the relative complexity of female characters http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/41330 Emma Hawkes on witches' careers http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/44006 Kneasy on the members' stereotyping http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84611 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/86706 Ginger on Molly and the mother stereotype http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/125296 And a link to the topics and schedule for the Nel discussion http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/125653 We need a volunteer for the next topic - Snape, scheduled for next week. Any takers? Debbie (hoping at least one Snape fan will volunteer) From cat_kind at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 14:49:25 2005 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 14:49:25 -0000 Subject: What has Harry learned? (Re: Hans) In-Reply-To: <20050405205741.12324.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127416 > Hans: > This is why I predicted in April 2003 what was coming in future > books, and I was very happy to see many of my predictions verified > even as early as book 5. > > catkind: Message number? > > Hans: 55793 of 21-04-03. In my post 67775 of 06-07-03 I explained how my predictions came out. Hans in Post #55793: >In the first book Harry can gain access to the Stone only if he doesn't want to use it. He does not want earthly wealth and longevity. He has been liberated from the desire to live on the physical plane.< >In the second book Harry liberates an elf. Elves, goblins, gnomes, fire-salamanders etc. are etheric creatures. Harry achieves liberation on the etheric plane (the plane of life force).< >In the third book Harry learns to conquer fear. This is liberation on the astral(emotional) plane.< >In the fourth book Harry develops his will to such an extent that he can actually drive back the curse coming out of Lucifer's (Voldemort) wand by pitting his will-power against Lucifer's. The eternal soul has achieved liberation on the mental plane.< > 1. the liberation of the mental-I: Harry's ability to throw Voldemort's > possession off by his love of Sirius. > Book 6 will deal with the liberation of the emotional-I in the heart. > Book 7 will deal with the liberation of the consciousness-I in the head. I feel that the Gate of Saturn or archway in the Department of Mysteries will come into this, as passing through this gate means overcoming death. catkind: Hans' posts equate Harry's progress through the books with steps in a process of religious "liberation". In this post I'm just considering the version with seven steps associated to liberation from seven planes: physical, etheric/life, astral/emotional, mental, mental ego, emotional ego, consciousness ego. That got me thinking about what Harry has learned and how he has developed as a person over the series. I don't entirely agree with Hans' take on some of the books, I'd love to know what other people think. Hope this hasn't already been flogged out, but if so I'd be grateful for a post number! PS: Starting at the beginning, Hans says that Harry has learned in PS not to want wealth and earthly longevity. I'm already unhappy with this statement. It seems to me that Harry was not particularly interested in these things in the first place. Moreover, he has discovered in PS that he already has a large fortune, and as a wizard can expect an extremely long life-span. I'd be more inclined to say he was freed from the "physical plane" if he'd thrown away one or other of these, or if he had shown himself particularly afraid of mortality or poverty. As it is, already having wealth and long life, he does not need the Stone, so it is no surprise that he doesn't want it. If I was to try to sum up what Harry learns in PS I'd say it was something to do with friendship. At the start of the book, he has never had any friends. At the end, Hermione compliments him specifically on "friendship and bravery". I'm still not entirely satisfied with this, as friendship too seems to come naturally to Harry. He's already got the hang of it pretty well on the Hogwarts Express ("I think I can tell the right sort for myself, thanks"), and when he stands up for Neville over the Remembrall. CoS: Hans' point here uses a different side of his symbolisms, so I'll leave it out. Again I'm kind of stuck when it comes to what Harry has learnt. The theme seems to be discrimination, but again, this is something Harry already knows far too much about, having been thoroughly discriminated against by the Dursleys for his magical nature. PoA: Agreed, it's all about learning to combat fear, what with Boggarts and Dementors and Death Omens all over the shop. GoF: This is more on the virtues demonstrated side than the virtues learned side, but Harry shows a strong sense of fair play here. Otherwise I'm again at a loss. True, Harry has to fight off Imperius, a mind-control spell. He also has to survive Cruciatus, which seems more physical, and dodge Avada Kedavra - which I might assign to the consciousness ego or the etheric/life plane if I have to assign it to one of Hans' planes, on the grounds that death is the end of your conscious ego and the end of your life. OotP: Here Hans has another mental liberation. I'd see at least as good a fit to one of the emotional planes (so the third, or the sixth in Hans' system). This book is all about Harry's CAPSLOCK emotions and trying to control his emotions. There's also his feelings for Cho, which he does eventually get "liberated" from. (Snape quotes from the Lexicon: "I told you to empty yourself of emotion!", "Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked this easily -- weak people, in other words -- they stand no chance against his powers! He will penetrate your mind with absurd ease, Potter!") Even that doesn't fit very well, as although his failure to control his emotions takes Harry to the ministry, it turns out that it is having his emotions (particularly love) uncontrolled that expels Voldemort. There's also the question of Harry's possible leadership skills. Do people think Harry is a great leader? I've seen more sign of him being a good /teacher/, though he hasn't had much competition on the DADA front. Hermione is still doing a lot of the leading in my opinion. HBP/Book 7: Voldemort is pretty much guaranteed to die in Book 7, and Harry almost always nearly-dies, so Hans should have no problem with consciousness ego in Book 7. I think there might be a problem with emotional ego for Book 6. Although every year has had something to do with emotions and love, I strongly suspect the Room of Love showdown, if any, will be Book 7. This is based on the fact that themes like this tend to jump a book; I'd be surprised if we're back in the DoM already in July. Also, love is showing signs of being the big theme. If Lily's love banished LV the first time, a lot of people are theorising that this will also be the key for Book 7. What might Harry learn in HBP, then? I'm hoping, especially in light of the covers we've seen, that he'll learn to work with adults like Dumbledore and maybe even Snape. Or maybe it's more a question of the adults learning to work with Harry. Anyway, here's hoping someone has more coherent thoughts than me on the subject. catkind From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 15:00:46 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 15:00:46 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127417 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dysis" wrote: > > The Ministry uses special magic to detect when an underage wizard > has done magic. Yet, we see a teenager doing magic in his own > bedroom without any qualms. Aside from the other speculations, it's possible that Snape was simply of age. Both Ron and Hermione will be of age in the summer after their sixth year, and Harry will be of age for the last half of it. Amiable Dorsai. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 11 15:37:54 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 15:37:54 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127418 Pippin: >>>It seems to me far more straightforward to see Snape as a fragile ego, struggling to avoid admitting that he can't defend himself. than as a hyperinflated one. Lockhart, when he knows he's outgunned, has no shame at all about running away. *That*'s* Narcissism.<<< SSSusan: But, see, this is what I've been working to express! NPD *doesn't* boil down to "conceited" nor to *simply* a hyperinflated ego. In fact, I *agree* with you that Snape has a fragile ego! See this bit from my post #127352: >>I think one has to give the definitions/characteristics of NPD a real look before considering it bunk, rather than just thinking "narcissism = crazy" or "narcissism = extreme vanity." It's more complex than that. One has to get away from the notion that a narcissist is STURDY individual with a healthy, positive ego. There *is* an inflated ego presented to the world, and an arrogance. But it's an overcompensating, it's a masking a self- image which, while positive, is FRAGILELY so.<< As I see it, for the narcissist it's all about how FRAGILE the internal construct is. There isn't a whole lotta introspection going on with a narcissist; it's too frightening to look in there. So, yes, there's an arrogance and an inflated sense of self-worth, but it's fragile. Pippin: >>> I really can't square Narcissistic!Snape with the man who grips the back of his chair as he asks how McGonagall can be sure someone has been taken by the monster, or the one who saved Harry's life first year and has never yet brought it up to him. Not once.<<< Nora: >>I don't think it means that he can't be concerned and doesn't care. There's an unknown hanging over this of why Snape ditched the DEs, which should tell us something deep about his character, be it self- interest, moral conversion, revenge--I don't know, and neither does anyone but JKR. The narcissism aspect does speak to some of the insecurities and behavioral peculiarities that he seems to evince. He doesn't say anything about the first-year incident (not that everyone agrees that is a straightforward case of 'Snape saves Harry's *life*'), but one wonders if the "You should be thanking me on bended knee" isn't an explosion of built-up frustration.<< SSSusan: I am not positive I'm right about this NPD "diagnosis" of Snape; yet I am pretty positive that Snape exhibits several narcissistic traits [::waves at Kemper::]. I would certainly never say that Snape is the *most* narcissistic person I've ever read about or encountered, but I think there's enough of it there to add that narcissistic! descriptor. Now, Pippin raises an interesting question about the things which *don't* square for her with the narcissistic tag. And Nora mentions a very key issue in WHY Snape ditched Voldy & the DEs. This really will be the key, for me, in deciding whether NPD is the appropriate construct to be considering when reading Snape, and when we find out why he left, I think I'll either say "Aha!" or I'll say, "Hmmm. Well, okay, not NDP, then, but still some narcissistic traits." By way of example, if Snape had some sort of epiphany based upon introspection and reflection, and THAT'S what caused him to leave the DEs? Then, uh-uh, no way does that fit with NPD. Narcissists just AIN'T big on introspection, and their self-reports are notoriously unreliable. *If*, however, Snape left Voldy after some event... something which Snape took as a MAJOR **personal** affront [Kneasy's "Killed his wife & kids" scenario, for instance?], then I think there will be additional support for viewing Snape in the Narcissistic!Snape light. Pippin: > Some of that [description of Asperger's Syndrome] sounds eerily > like Snape and some of it doesn't. I don't think Snape was created > with one hand on the keyboard and the other in an abnormal > psychology text book. I think he's a composite of > several "difficult" people that JKR has known or observed in real > life. And this is very possible, Pippin. OTOH, JKR seems to be someone pretty familiar with mental health & psychological development issues -- the Dementors, Depression, teenage angst and all that -- and if a person has encountered an NPD, the symptoms aren't hard to recall. Remember, too, that you credit JKR with being a good enough writer to have built a character in Lupin who is believable as both good guy and ESE! JKR is talented, she knows how to do research, she's put a lot of effort into building characters we can see a LOT in. If she wanted to paint Snape as a narcissist, I don't think she'd have any trouble doing so well. Again, more canon will assist us, of course, and the Leaving Voldy piece of the puzzle will likely make or break the idea I raised. Siriusly Snapey Susan From cat_kind at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 16:31:52 2005 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 16:31:52 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a05041106197d4bfbaf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127419 catkind: If we're discussing gender issues, I hope I'm allowed to give the link to Maya's hilarious essay on Girl Power in (mainly) OotP. It's called Witches Are Doing It For Themselves: A Study of the Portrayal of Women In the Harry Potter Universe and is found here: http://www.lasairandmaya.com/mayaraves/witches.html catkind From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Mon Apr 11 11:11:57 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 11:11:57 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127420 imamommy: > > Whether DD will be proven physically immortal, as Tonks suggest, or > whether he will only live on in legacy and memory, is anyone's > guess. I hope, for his sake, he gets to leave the confines of this > world and go on to a better place, but that's just me. Deborah, now: A better place in whose opinion? Moaning Myrtle's? Any random Muggle televangelist's? I see no signs of DD experiencing any need or wish to opt out of life, however long he's been living it. On the contrary, he copes magificently with an extremely busy schedule, the parents, the staff, the students, the population of the Forbidden Forest, the portraits on his walls, the odd DE, LV past and present, the burden of his secret knowledge etc, etc - the old dear is having a wonderful time. And, as JKR informs us, humming cheerily to himself all the while! This 'leaving this world for a better place' idea is, IMO, a prime example of what I would not like the 'message' of the series to be, assuming that it will prove to have one and one only incontestable message. That this world is at some deep level unsatisfactory and not worth the effort and that our focus should be elsewhere. (Unfortunately this is the message of the Abrahamic religions in general, and, though rather differently, of Hinduism. I find it interesting how the Buddhist message is featured increasingly by fantasy novelists eg Pullman, Le Guin. Seems a bit healthier!) What are we telling our children to become - passive, dependent and lacking initiative? Anyway, as a (past) headmaster, DD will join his predecessors on the walls and, within those confines, will continue to be part of Hogwarts, albeit in another dimension. So, what's the problem? Deborah, happy in the here and now (but will be happier in mid-July!) From DANCERWH86 at aol.com Mon Apr 11 16:05:56 2005 From: DANCERWH86 at aol.com (Lindsay!!) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 16:05:56 -0000 Subject: What has Harry learned? (Re: Hans) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127421 Catkind: <<<<> What might Harry learn in HBP, then? I'm hoping, especially in light > of the covers we've seen, that he'll learn to work with adults like > Dumbledore and maybe even Snape. Or maybe it's more a question of the > adults learning to work with Harry. > Anyway, here's hoping someone has more coherent thoughts than me on > the subject.>>> In my personal opinion, while religious/spiritual theory and theology does play into and can be interpreted within the world of HP (Considering in some ways the Wizarding World seems to be a religion in and of itself...Merlin seems to become almost a deity and then of course their is temptation and early trappings seen most dominantly in Voldemort though also in Harry and his life), I think that the story boils down to a much simpler base. Mainly that it is the archetypal coming of age/hero story that has been seen throughout history. Harry (as well as many of his friends) are going through changes that are often seen in these types of stories as in real life (for example dealing with death, accepting fate, starting out as the poor boy who is treated badly and becoming the hero). Harry's biggest draw back now is his pain (over Sirius's death) and his lack of acceptance of his fate. He is in some ways merely going through the motions because he is told to not because he understands any of it. I think that acceptance and understanding is what is going to come with the last two books. Harry finally meeting his destiny. This may well include working with adults/authority figures like you mentioned. The adults in turn are each dealing with their own acceptance of what is to come. Afterall in some ways Snape is on his own Hero's journey, starting out as a put upon boy bullied in school who is now the spy working for the side of good. I think the characters are going to become more dynamic and round as the subject matter becomes more emotional and darker. I mean Philosopher's Stone is in many ways quite upbeat especially when put next to Order of the Phoenix. Just a few thoughts. Lindsay From bree4378 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 17:01:53 2005 From: bree4378 at yahoo.com (Sabrina) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:01:53 -0000 Subject: Is Tonks Irish? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127422 I was just wondering, does anyone know or remember any reference in OOTP that Tonks is Irish? I was listening to the audio book of OOTP, and the narrator was doing her voice in an Irish accent. So, I was wondering if anything like that was ever mentioned. Also do you think there is any way she is related with Seamus? ~Sabrina From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 11 17:12:16 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:12:16 -0000 Subject: Looking past the superficial (was: Is Snape nice or good?) In-Reply-To: <20050411001135.59705.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127423 Nora: > > One question which is not really solvable right now is whether it > > is (good, right, take your pick of adjectives) to tolerate > > behavior that is generally not considered (insert positive > > adjective here) because the person carrying it out is also > > responsible for things that are (second positive adjective here). Magda: > I would phrase your principle a different way: it's important to be > able to look past the superficial into the real person before > judging them. Harry hasn't yet learned this lesson; it's still > rather scary how he handed over the map to Fake!Moody in GOF > largely on the basis of an apparent mutual distaste for Snape. SSSusan: I recognize that my remark might not relate fully to the point that was being discussed here, but... I do hope you would include Snape in the category of people who need to learn to look past the superficial and into the real person before judging them? Methinks That JAMES Thing (and maybe the narcissist thing) is clouding Snape's ability to do that with Harry. Snape no more sees the real Harry than Harry sees the real Fake!Moody -- and, yes, it feels like a real oxymoron to type "real Fake!Moody -- or sees the real Snape, for that matter. (Then again, who the hell sees the real Snape, but that's another post.) Heck, there's probaby quite a list of people we could put on the "needs to look past the superficial & into the real person before judging" list, no? Sirius, perhaps, Draco, Ron on occasion, .... Any thoughts? Siriusly Snapey Susan From rosie_27018 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 01:45:02 2005 From: rosie_27018 at yahoo.com (Ann Crutchley) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 01:45:02 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127424 > dysisgirl: > I think we can reasonably conclude that Snape was > and still is good at the Dark Arts. After all, he was completely > immersed in his DADA OWL as we see in "Snape's Worst Memory." And > also, hasn't he been applying for the DADA teacher position ever > since we've known him? Where he learned it, well that's still a > mystery, unless someone out there has a good theory. Ann: I think the question we haven't asked ( or maybe someone has and I haven't read that post) Was Snape's family a good wizarding family or bad? And was Voldemort in power then. 1- if he was from a bad family then was there really anything the Minstry of Magic could do? Or maybe there was a way a bad wizarding family could be undeteced with bad magic. 2- if Volemort was in power who could really keep up? 3- Snape was a death eater at one time and I'm sure he learned a lot of dark magic, which really makes me think his family were dark lord supporters. > dysisgirl: > I'm most interested in how the Ministry > didn't send him a letter for Underage Wizardry. > The Ministry uses special magic to detect when an underage wizard > has done magic. Yet, we see a teenager doing magic in his own > bedroom without any qualms. Does he know some sort of spell that > shields him from the special magic that the Ministry uses to detect > underage magic? But what bothers me even more is that the Ministry > doesn't have a special detector of the Unforgivable Curses in > general, and not just by underage wizards. Why can the Ministry > detect Underage Wizardry, which isn't more than a felony, when it > can't detect Unforgivable Curses? Magic is magic, isn't it? Ann: If the Ministry did have ways of dectecting the unforgivable curse then they would have known before OOP that Volemort was back. And that would have been too easy. But I'm sure Malfoy and a few other DE didn't want that and assured the Ministry that since Volemort was gone that it wasn't needed. There's a lot about Snape we don't know but I'm sure that he's from a bad wizarding family and they used dark magic and that is how Snape learned and did so well on his OWLS. Ann From cat_kind at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 17:37:48 2005 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:37:48 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127425 > Tonks: > > > Well this might not be the popular idea, but I think that DD is > > > imortal. > snip > So if I think that out, I guess > > > it means he dies at some point, but never really. He always comes > > > back. So in that way DD can never die. After all in SS/PS he says > > > that he will never be gone from Hogwarts as long as someone there > > > needs him, or was it believes in him. Anyway I think that means > that > > > he can not die. > snip > > imamommy: > I think this plays into the them that's already been introduced: > that Harry needs to learn that (in this series, at any rate) death is > not the end, there is an existence beyond the veil, and the ones we > love never truly leave us. (That's a movie quote, I know, but I like > it.) > > Whether DD will be proven physically immortal, as Tonks suggest, or > whether he will only live on in legacy and memory, is anyone's > guess. I hope, for his sake, he gets to leave the confines of this > world and go on to a better place, but that's just me. > > imamommy catkind: Here's a couple of Dumbledore quotes on death and the dead (taken from willowsevern's wonderful character guides): Dumbledore(PS): "To one as young as you, I'm sure it seems incredible, but to Nicolas and Perenelle, it really is like going to bed after a very, very long day. After all, to the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure. You know, the Stone was really not such a wonderful thing. As much money and life as you could want! The two things most human beings would choose above all -- the trouble is, humans do have a knack of choosing precisely those things that are worst for them." Harry(PoA): "It was stupid, thinking it was him," he muttered. "I mean, I knew he was dead." DD replies: "You think the dead we loved ever truly leave us? You think that we don't recall them more clearly than ever in times of great trouble? Your father is alive in you, Harry, and shows himself most plainly when you have need of him. How else could you produce that particular Patronus? Prongs rode again last night." I don't think an (earthly) immortal would make the first statement, though it sounds like DD believes in an afterlife of some kind. I wanted to include the second quote because I find it rather less trite than the film version. (Ah - I didn't say that. Honest. Film, what film?) It also indicates clearly that DD's idea of the dead still being around is about the memory of them and not themselves. Then of course there's the enigmatic exchange DD: "We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom,"..."Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit-" LV: "There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore!" DD: "You are quite wrong,"... "Indeed, your failure to understand that there are things much worse than death has always been your greatest weakness - " At least, I'm assuming it's supposed to be enigmatic. Actually, we've already seen one thing that's worse than death: being soul-sucked by a Dementor. I don't see how LV can have missed that, he seems quite friendly with the Dementors. But what on earth is DD planning? Not just killing LV but also... Or not killing him at all? It would be poetic justice to take away Voldemort's magic and leave him a Muggle, but would seem to violate the "either must die at the hand of the other". For what it's worth, my current mad theory is that DD will die, and in a sacrificial way, but not for Harry, for Snape. For example, Snape could get caught spying and DD go in to rescue him, getting killed in the process. This is based on no logic whatsoever, just on the dramatic possibilities of the scenario. I think Harry's had enough people dying for him, poor kid. catkind - off to look up old threads about things much worse than death From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 18:32:28 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 11:32:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Man the canons Re: Snape vs. Sirius (was: Snape's Stubbornness) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050411183228.53630.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127426 --- unicorn_72 wrote: > Now, my question is, and I think I've posed this before. Why did > Lily help Snape?? Two things: 1. As you say, she's a decent compassionate human being who would stand up for anyone she thought was being harassed or picked on. So it's not Snape personally that she's rushing to help - it could be any student. 2. She's furious with James Potter for acting like a total jerk when he should be so much better a person. Any girl who can reel off so many things that a boy does that irritate her is a girl who is paying a LOT of attention to that guy. It's noteworthy that she doesn't even mention Sirius although he's also involved in the bullying. She focused entirely on James. And it's hilarious that both James and Harry don't get it. They think she hates James. She doesn't; she's just bitterly disappointed that he's acting so badly. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Apr 11 19:44:37 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 19:44:37 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127427 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > wrote: > > > > Some of that sounds eerily like Snape and some of it doesn't. > > I don't think Snape was created with one hand on the keyboard and > > the other in an abnormal psychology text book. > > I certainly agree witht that. However, I wouldn't be too sure that > JKR doesn't have some pretty specific mental/spiritual faults in mind when she crafted Snape. > > Lupinlore, who is looking forward eagerly to seeing Snape get his > much-deserved, and hopefully extremely painful, karmic payback. Pippin: You want to see someone punished for mental/spiritual faults?? *Moral* faults are another matter. In so far as Snape chooses what is easy over what is right, he deserves (IMO) retribution, as a reminder that the wrong path is never easier in the long run. In so far as Snape can't distinguish the right path, however, I don't think he deserves to be punished for not choosing it. For example, if Snape has some sort of mental defect that keeps him from changing his mind easily, then IMO, he shoudn't be blamed for not changing it as quickly as one might expect. That could answer the riddle of how he managed to get in so deep with the Death Eaters, if he was the sort to be morally disgusted by what they were doing. If he, like Regulus, joined the DE's not knowing what they really were capable of, it might take him a much longer time than Regulus to react to the information once he found out, long enough to convince Voldemort that Snape could be trusted with inside information. Pippin From feenyjam at msu.edu Mon Apr 11 17:41:30 2005 From: feenyjam at msu.edu (greenfirespike) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 17:41:30 -0000 Subject: Home-Schooling in the Wizard World (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127428 After following several wonderful threads from the past week, a question began to reemerge regarding education within the WW. Are any wizards home-schooled? If this at all interests you, please follow along. JKR states on her website that Hogwarts is the only magical school in England. We also know there are a few other schools in other countries. However, it appears that the wizarding community is much lager than the population of students at Hogwarts (estimated by JKR as about 1000 students, or roughly 143 students per year, and 47 students per house roughly) suggests. This could be due to a few factors, which I have discussed below. (see aside on National Wizard Schooling Systems below for more) Squibs all around I am going to assume that the occurrence of Squibs is low (although large enough to create a market, even if it's a sham, to teach magic to Squibs). To assume a high rate of Squibs would slowly dwindle the WW population down to extinction level. I am also going to assume that there are only slightly more occurrences of a magical children being born into a Muggle family than the occurrence of Squibs. I don't assume a large number of magical children born of Muggle parents to replace a large number of Squibs because it undermines the likelihood that the WW could remain fairly hidden from the MW. I base this on no particular piece of cannon, and for that I apologize. A population boom then decline Another reason there may be more adults in the WW than present levels of kids at Hogwarts would suggest is the idea of a population boom and sudden decline in the number of wizards. This is likely, as there was a pervious war between LV and OofP and MofM, and lots of people die in a war. Secondly, LV's rise to power and the actions of DE's may have caused wizards to refrain from having children for dozens of very good reasons. I have seen this theory suggested before on the Lexicon and I agree with it. In the alternative However, if the wizard population remains about the same has it has always been, we are left with only a few logical alternatives for schooling options based on my estimated population of the WW. 1) Not every magical child attends a wizarding school. If every magical child in Britain attends Hogwarts, or is at the very least given the opportunity to attend, not every child does. Perhaps home-schooling is common in the WW. This doesn't seem like an unrealistic concept, especially for children born from magical parents. Assuming Hogwarts costs some amount of money, perhaps home- schooling is a reasonable alternative. Assuming that Hogwarts can afford to give income based scholarships; parents may prefer to educate their child at regardless. Finally, Assuming Hogwarts is free, magical parents may decide they would rather educate their children by a private tutor rather than trust them to DD and staff at a school where the poor populate the ranks. (I submit this is the actual case, where Hogwarts is free to attend for all students) Alternatively, some of the wealthy wizard families may chose to have their children tutored in the arts of magic privately. Again, I see no cannon to support this, but nothing that makes this an outlandish claim. A strong point against this is the Malfoy family. With wealth, family pedigree, and significant amounts of influence, they still choose to send their only child to Hogwarts. 2) Not all who attend Hogwarts graduate, I'm banking that there must be a few out there who have failed N.E.W.T.'s. Hagrid was expelled and JKR once explained Marcs Flint's second seventh year was perhaps because he failed his N.E.W.T.'s, implying that you are allowed to retake your N.E.W.T.'s if you fail them. But there must come some point when a 27 year old wizard just gives up and decides to get a job without their N.E.W.T. degree. 3) The successful Dresuley's; aka the Muggle family who successfully hides the Hogwarts acceptance letter from their child. While DD and others insisted that HP get notice of his acceptance and that he attend Hogwarts, there is no guarantee that every magical child receives such treatment. It is possible that a letter alone suffices as notice for non famous magical children, and the Muggle parents (no doubt ashamed by this new discovery) hide the letter and never allows the child to know of the existence of the WW. The National School System We know that Hogwarts is the only school in Britain, and we know of a few other schools located in other Countries, but that is all. This leaves me to speculate that each County has its own national school and government (aka what we see in the HP novels). The idea of a state sponsored school system is supported by cannon where the Ministry of Magic has governing powers over Hogwarts. The MofM can remove headmasters, arrange to kill beasts who are arguably Hogwarts property, and summon children who violate the no magic over the summer rule via a rather large and ornate trial. In summation . I just wanted to put out a few of the major options that exist to explain alternatives to a Hogwarts education. I believe that most magical children attend Hogwarts, and the home-schooled magical child is rare indeed. Greenfirespike From chrissilein at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 20:00:04 2005 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:00:04 -0000 Subject: Will Trelawney die? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127429 Will Trelawney die? Is there maybe any evidence Trelawney will not survive book 6 or 7? I honestly think so! There are probably clues in the books, too. This is a theory! We already know that Trelawney predicts the right things while she interpretates them sometimes in the wrong way. I will start with book 3. In chapter six, Talons and Tea Leaves, she sees the Grim. ?My dear", Professor Trelawney?s huge eyed opened dramatically, ?you have the Grim." ?My dear boy, it is an omen ? the worst omen ? of death!" Ron is convinced that the wizard/witch dies who sees the Grim. Indeed nobody than Trelawney sees the Grim. Because of the fact that Harry and Voldemort are equivalents in several ways, my guess is that Voldemort is probably the one who brings Trelawney the death. Why? Voldemort wants the prophecy (book 5). He still didn?t get it. We know that he cannot easily kidnap Harry and of course not Dumbledore. Both of them know the prophecy. And Trelawney knows it, of course. Not that she is aware of it, but because of his excellent Legilimens abilities Voldemort is probably capable of infiltrating Trelawney?s hidden parts of her mind. Is there any evidence in book 5 which leads me to the idea that trelawney is in real danger? Yes, there are several points I would like to mention. 1.Trelawney is replaced and Firence is introduced as the new divination teacher. He will die if he goes back to his on race. 2.One of the Patil twins has a crucial experience with the Thestrals. Parvati says in chapter 21, The Eye of the Snake : ? I think I felt something, I think it?s near me!" She feels the Thestral. She feels the present of death and my guess is that it?s maybe the death of her beloved teacher Trelawney is near. The trouble of course is that someone has to get hold of Trelawney. Who is a possible person who is capably of kidnapping and maybe killing Trelawney? It?s Bellatrix. In 36, chapter The only One He Ever Feared you can ready these words: ? Be quiet, Bella", said Voldemort dangerously. ?I will deal with you in a moment." So Voldemort wasn?t satisfied with Bella?s ?service" to fight and kill Sirius. He wants more! Bellatrix is fanatic and dangerous enough to do anything to get better reputation of her master and Lord and is probably ready to capture the seeress Trelawney for him. Maybe you think that?s too farfetched. Maybe it is. But Voldemort has his motives to get the prophecy. He knows that he never heard the full wording of it. He knows the prophecy is essential important in terms of his own existence. If he gets it he can reach ?better dicisions". And we always have to remember that a death of one of the characters is always in the context to Harry?s evolution. It?s hard when I write that Trelawney will have done her job, if all keyfigures are aware of the prophecy. Your thoughts, please. Sorry, my english isn?t perfect. From mfterman at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 20:58:09 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 20:58:09 -0000 Subject: Will Trelawney die? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127430 My own feeling is that Trelawney has one more prophecy in her about the showdown between Harry and Voldemort, which she will give in book six, afterwards she's pretty much a dead woman walking. She might even be killed in the middle of her prediction in case Voldemort is hearing something that he doesn't like. She's a fairly minor character and her death won't disrupt things too much. From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 21:08:20 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:08:20 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127431 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > >>Kemper stepping into the fire: > >Betsy, you may be confusing Mood and Psychotic Disorders with > Personality Disorders. Mood and Psychotic Dxs are generally chemical > imbalances. Personality dxs are not. You are born with a mood or > psychotic dx. You are raised a personality dx. Effed up Nature > versus effed up Nurture.< > > Betsy: > Thanks, Kemper, for clarifying this for me. I can more easily accept > effed up Nurture!Snape than effed up Nature!Snape. In this case, > Nurture is much more interesting. (Still not completely onboard the > NPD train, though. *g*) > > Betsy Personality Disorders are characterological in nature. These, actually, are regarded as more serious psychopathology than other psychiatric/psychological disorders. This is why they are coded on Axis II rather than Axis I, with the only other disorder on Axis II being mental retardation. While I can see why some would think of Snape as having some Narcissistic characteristics, I would not diagnose him with this. Lucious Malfoy, yes, but not Snape. Julie From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 11 21:42:12 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:42:12 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127432 Julie: > Personality Disorders are characterological in nature. These, > actually, are regarded as more serious psychopathology than other > psychiatric/psychological disorders. This is why they are coded on > Axis II rather than Axis I, with the only other disorder on Axis II > being mental retardation. While I can see why some would think of > Snape as having some Narcissistic characteristics, I would not > diagnose him with this. Lucious Malfoy, yes, but not Snape. SSSusan: Oh, now, you *can't* stop there, Julie! Please go on re: Lucius! We've talked about Snape and a little about Lockhart in this vein. Will you make the case for Lucius? Siriusly Snapey Susan From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 21:47:51 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:47:51 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127433 >>Catkind: >If we're discussing gender issues, I hope I'm allowed to give the link to Maya's hilarious essay on Girl Power in (mainly) OotP. >It's called Witches Are Doing It For Themselves: A Study of the Portrayal of Women In the Harry Potter Universe and is found here: http://www.lasairandmaya.com/mayaraves/witches.html < Betsy: Right - LMAO on that one. It's funny, 'cause it's *true*! That's why I tend to boggle when it's suggested that the Harry Potter books are sexist. How can Hermione get any more powerful? Oh, she shrieks a little while flying? Doesn't calmly leading an enemy into the Forbidden Forest to be taken down by hostile Centaurs negate that little flaw, just a tad? (And maybe the Centaurs' were correct in their outrage. They *knew* Hermione was using them like a shiny new tool. Grawp, of course, was just thrilled to be used.) Then there's the whole, "Yes Hermione's smart, but she's got bushy hair! Why can't smart be beautiful, you sexist pigs?" And yet, there's Hermione pulling down the international sports star. The man all of Hogwarts was swooning over. Including Ron. I agree with the end of the piece where Maya suggests that the women are sometimes *too* You Go Girl! at times, and some real weaknesses might have been nice and a bit more wellrounded too. And maybe that's why JKR made Harry a boy. She may have well recognized her reluctance to give her women true weaknesses so she concentrated on the men. And just 'cause I want to, most favorite line in Maya's essay: "Only Even Cooler Women can defeat women [...] Harry gets to die of mortification, Hermione gets to make Rita Skeeter her bitch." Betsy From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Apr 11 22:21:19 2005 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:21:19 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nel Question #9: Gender References: <1113231450.70642.47387.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003f01c53ee5$2c20b0e0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 127434 Debbie posed the question: > 3. JKR stated in an interview, "Although it is true that you do have > a headmaster as opposed to a headmistress, but that has not always > been the case. As you will find out, there have been equal numbers of > headmistresses." > http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-cbc-rogers.htm > QTTA and FBAWTFT also mention women ministers of magic going back to > the 14th century. Do you think the books themselves convey the same > impression of equal representation in education? In government? Stepping back in Potterverse history: is there any way that women in the WW could have been rendered subordinate to men in the way that women were in our own world? As magical ability doesn't appear to go up along with physical strength, I'd suggest that the answer is no. If so, then once a seperate WW has established itself and is in a position to operate its own rules, there is no question of female subordination. Equal magical ability automatically gives certain protections. A far longer life span, combined with a period of childhood comparable with Muggles, means that the length of time spent on motherhood is potentially far less. Add to that the canon evidence of prominent women in the WW (eg two of the four Founders) and you've got the foundation for far greater equality than our world has even today. Cheers FFred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 22:28:23 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:28:23 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127435 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Julie: > > Personality Disorders are characterological in nature. These, > > actually, are regarded as more serious psychopathology than other > > psychiatric/psychological disorders. This is why they are coded on > > Axis II rather than Axis I, with the only other disorder on Axis II > > being mental retardation. While I can see why some would think of > > Snape as having some Narcissistic characteristics, I would not > > diagnose him with this. Lucious Malfoy, yes, but not Snape. > > > SSSusan: > Oh, now, you *can't* stop there, Julie! Please go on re: Lucius! > We've talked about Snape and a little about Lockhart in this vein. > Will you make the case for Lucius? > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Ok, but I do not have my HP books at work, so I cannot quote canon. I will speak of the general characteristics we know of LM. In the DSM-IV, Narcissitic Personality Disorder criteria are the following (need to endorse 5 or more): 1. "Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)" --> While canon does not provide us with his talents or abilities as a wizard or his achievements, he does have that air of superiority, even with DD who is, by the comments of others, a much more powerful wizard than LM. 2. "Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love" --> Again, we are not provided with insight into what preoccupies his fantasies, but he certainly does seem to feed off of power (LV, the Ministry of Magic, etc.). He aligns himself with powerful people, institutions, etc., even when they seem diametrically opposed to each other. This sometimes is referred to as "closet narcissism." 3. "Believes that he or she is 'special' and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high- status people (or institutions)" --> see above and also consider how he views the Weasleys, not to mention Muggles or house-elves. 4. "Requires excessive admiration" --> Again, no direct canon evidence for this, but implication is there that he would tolerate more people who admired him than people who do not (confrontation with Arthur Weasley in COS, for example). 5. "Has a sense of entitlement (i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations" --> Consider the changes he tries to affect at Hogwarts, the scene at the Quidditch World Cup, etc. 6. "Is interpersonally exploitative (i.e., takes advantage of toehrs to achieve his or her own ends)" --> No direct canon evidence but consider (a) reasons for being a DE and (b) how did he get his money? 7. "Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others" --> I would argue that this is a given for DEs. We also see this in the limited interactions we have seen with Draco and with his treatment of Dobby. 8. "Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her" --> I can think of no canon evidence for this, but at least the last part sounds plausible for his character. 9. "Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes" --> I would say this characterizes all of his behaviors we have seen in the series thus far. So, I see where Lucious actually exceeds the 5 criteria needed for this diagnosis, even with the limited canon evidence we have on him. I made a case for 8 of the 9, excluding #8. He may also meet diagnostic criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder, but without more canon evidence, particularly his behavior in adolescence, I would keep this as a "Rule Out" diagnosis. SSSusan, I hope this is what you were asking me. I'd certainly be interested in others' views. Julie (By the way, in case anyone was wondering, I am a Clinical Psychologist.) From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 22:58:15 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 22:58:15 -0000 Subject: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned? (Re: Hans) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127436 >>Catkind: >There's also the question of Harry's possible leadership skills. Do people think Harry is a great leader? I've seen more sign of him being a good /teacher/, though he hasn't had much competition on the DADA front. Hermione is still doing a lot of the leading in my opinion.< Betsy: I think where Harry's leadership skills are lacking is in his *reluctance* to lead. From PS/SS to OotP, Harry tries to go on his big adventures alone. (I think he was more forceful on this point in OotP, but he was fairly innocent of danger in PS/SS.) Fortunately for him, no one listens, and he survives to fight another day. But, other than that, I think Harry is actually a pretty good leader, much better than Hermione, for one simple reason: charisma. Harry can rally the troops, which is absolutely vital for a leader, especially one facing not so great odds. Even Hermione admits this. Students will join the DA for Harry, not for her. Hermione is a brilliant strategist (something Harry wisely recognizes and uses - more leadership skills) but all of her plans would be for naught if no one cared to follow. Harry, they'd follow. It could be argued that the students flocked to Harry because of his background and his press. After all, he defeated Voldemort when he was a mere infant, surely he can do it again! But I think there's more to it. After all, by OotP, word on the street is Harry's crazy. He'd popped his magical mojo in his first go around with Voldemort, and now he's just an attention-grabbing misfit with delusions of grandeur. The interesting thing is, when the students first started showing up for DA meetings, several seemed to believe the reports. So why did they come at all? They came because even with the constant bad press, they could tell there was something more to Harry. Hell, even Draco noticed it in his very first scene. Why else would he bother with a skinny little kid, from an unknown family, in ill-fitting clothing? And if anyone can spot someone with leadership skills, I imagine Draco, our resident sycophant, would be the one. And once in front of the group, Harry had them eating out of the palm of his hand. I mean, Harry's no craver of the spotlight, but the boy's got a natural sense of drama. Reread the very first meeting at the Hog's Head, and you'll notice Hermione stuttering and "um"ing her way through the introductionary bit. But when the spotlight finally turns on Harry, he speaks smoothly, quietly, and lays it all out in a few simple sentences. "The whole group seemed to have held its breath while Harry spoke." (OotP Scholastic Ed. hardback p. 341) In the classroom, Harry again, uses his sense of the dramatic to bring the class in line. " 'Oh *please*,' said Zacharias Smith, rolling his eyes and folding his arms. 'I don't think *Expelliarmus* is exactly going to help us against You-Know-Who, do you?' 'I've used it against him,' said Harry quietly. 'It saved my life last June.' Smith opened his mouth stupidly. The rest of the room was very quiet. 'But if you think it's beneath you, you can leave,' Harry said. Smith did not move. Nor did anybody else." (ibid p. 392) Faced with someone with the skills of a professional heckler, Harry quietly and efficiently brings, not only Smith, but the rest of the class into line. "It felt odd to be issuing instructions, but not nearly as odd as seeing them followed." (ibid pp. 392-393) When Harry makes his mind up, he gets people to do what he says. Remember, this class is made up of students pulling down higher grades, students a year or two ahead of him, and the twins. And yet, it runs incredibly smoothly, because they all follow Harry. This translates into the leadership Harry shows at the MoM. Going to the MoM was not a brilliant idea, no, but Harry gets his troops there, gets them in, and when faced with overwhelming odds, keeps them alive for an incredible length of time. Remember, this is 4th and 5th year students going up against Death Eaters. And Harry manages to prevent a slaughter. Yes, the Death Eaters would have won in the end, if Lupin and co. hadn't shown up. But Harry's gang lasts longer than the Order memembers do, and they put some serious hurt on a few of the Death Eaters before they're taken down. Not bad for a panicked teenager and his group of Hogwarts weirdos. (Anyone else get an Ender's Game vibe, here?) Hermione is definitely the planner; she's also the ideas gal. But anytime she tries to get support for her cause, she fails rather miserably. (SPEW, anyone?) Harry comes up with a hairbrained scheme to storm the MoM, and he gets people *begging* to come along. Now *that's* leadership. Betsy From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Apr 11 23:36:24 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:36:24 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's death (was JKR's site up-date - Rumours Section) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127437 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "deborahhbbrd" wrote: > > Deborah, now: > > A better place in whose opinion? Moaning Myrtle's? Any random Muggle > televangelist's? I see no signs of DD experiencing any need or wish > to opt out of life, however long he's been living it. Hickengruendler: I don't think that's what Dumbledore wants right now, he seems to enjoy his life very much. Not to mention that he probably helps protecting a lot of other lives from Voldemort. But I do think he is prepared for it to happen: "For the well adjusted mind, death is nothing but the next great adventure". These are not the words of someone, who thinks that he'll live forever, or who wants to live forever. And as much as I pity (and like!) Moaning Myrtle, I don't think we are supposed to see her as a role model. ;-) Lily Potter, for example, didn't come back. On the contrary, > he copes magificently with an extremely busy schedule, the parents, > the staff, the students, the population of the Forbidden Forest, the > portraits on his walls, the odd DE, LV past and present, the burden of > his secret knowledge etc, etc - the old dear is having a wonderful > time. And, as JKR informs us, humming cheerily to himself all the while! Hickengruendler: And that's exactly why I think he has to die at some point of the series. But despite of his failures in OotP, he is a very capable wizard and many people depend on him. And for the sake of the story, I just think it would be better if he's gone and said people fight the enemy alone (but still together). In other words, I think that for example Harry and Snape have to work together without Dumbledore telling them to do so. It's not just a question of the heroe losing his mentor (which is of course done in many other heroe myths), but also that Dumbledore's death would help the plot flowing. And I think he could be some help even from beyond the grave. He did hint at this in CoS. As long as the people in Hogwarts and the Order fight for his cause, I think he will be able to help them from the beyond one last time (although I have no idea how). > > This 'leaving this world for a better place' idea is, IMO, a prime > example of what I would not like the 'message' of the series to be, > assuming that it will prove to have one and one only incontestable > message. That this world is at some deep level unsatisfactory and not > worth the effort and that our focus should be elsewhere. Hickengruendler: That would be true if it were Harry we were talking about, IMO. But Dumbledore has lived his life on this world. He tried his best to make Hogwarts a safe haven and a better world for everybody, even the outsiders. Dumbledore did face the problems from this world and he conquered many of them. And I think at the end of a very long day, he also deserves some rest. Hickengruendler From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 11 23:39:39 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:39:39 -0000 Subject: Is Tonks Irish? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127438 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sabrina" wrote: > > I was just wondering, does anyone know or remember any reference in > OOTP that Tonks is Irish? I was listening to the audio book of OOTP, > and the narrator was doing her voice in an Irish accent. So, I was > wondering if anything like that was ever mentioned. Also do you think > there is any way she is related with Seamus? Hannah: There isn't any reference in the books to her being Irish. I don't think there are any Irish connections on the Black side of the family, they all seem to be very aristocratic English types. And her father was a Muggle-born, so a connection to Seamus is very unlikely. His Dad was a Muggle (possible distant connection there, though Seamus' comment in PS suggests his father didn't know about magic before his mother revealed she was a witch), and as his mother was a witch she can't have been related to Ted Tonks. Therefore I think it's very unlikely that Tonks and Seamus are related. She may be Irish, I suppose, on her Dad's side. Or perhaps they moved to Ireland when escaping Voldemort and the Blacks. That could account for her having an Irish accent. But really I think it's down to interpretation on the part of the narrator. Tonks' lines in OotP don't sound like they're meant to be in an Irish accent, and no one has commented on it. Hannah From jmrazo at hotmail.com Mon Apr 11 23:58:04 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 23:58:04 -0000 Subject: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned? (Re: Hans) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127439 > Betsy: > In the classroom, Harry again, uses his sense of the dramatic to > bring the class in line. > > " 'Oh *please*,' said Zacharias Smith, rolling his eyes and folding > his arms. 'I don't think *Expelliarmus* is exactly going to help us > against You-Know-Who, do you?' > 'I've used it against him,' said Harry quietly. 'It saved my life > last June.' > Smith opened his mouth stupidly. The rest of the room was very > quiet. > 'But if you think it's beneath you, you can leave,' Harry said. > Smith did not move. Nor did anybody else." (ibid p. 392) > > Faced with someone with the skills of a professional heckler, Harry > quietly and efficiently brings, not only Smith, but the rest of the > class into line. This is one of my favorite scenes in the book. I laughed for about five minutes when I read how fast Harry shuts down Zack. And for all of my problems with OOTP, I love that Harry is a good teacher. It adds something to his character and gives him a skill not a lot of fantasy heros have. Usually the advisors are the teachers, but not in Harry's case and I love it. But Harry's gang > lasts longer than the Order memembers do, and they put some serious > hurt on a few of the Death Eaters before they're taken down. Not > bad for a panicked teenager and his group of Hogwarts weirdos. > (Anyone else get an Ender's Game vibe, here?) Enders Game is one of my all time favorite novels and yes, I did get an ender wiggins vibe from Harry. I hope it gets stronger. I love Ender. > Hermione is definitely the planner; she's also the ideas gal. But > anytime she tries to get support for her cause, she fails rather > miserably. (SPEW, anyone?) Harry comes up with a hairbrained > scheme to storm the MoM, and he gets people *begging* to come > along. Now *that's* leadership. This paragraph made me laugh out loud. Do you mind if I paraphrase part of this for a fic of mine, Betsy? Phoenixgod2000 From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Apr 12 00:12:17 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 00:12:17 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned? (Re: Hans) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127440 Betsy wrote: > Hermione >is a brilliant strategist (something Harry wisely recognizes and >uses - more leadership skills) but all of her plans would be for >naught if no one cared to follow. Harry, they'd follow. sherry now do you truly see hermione as a brilliant planner and strategist? i have never thought of her in that way, and i would love to hear your thoughts on that. great post, by the way, i really liked your points about harry and his leadership skills. sherry From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Apr 12 00:42:57 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 00:42:57 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127441 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > >> Pippin: > You want to see someone punished for mental/spiritual faults?? *Moral* > faults are another matter. In so far as Snape chooses what is easy > over what is right, he deserves (IMO) retribution, as a reminder that > the wrong path is never easier in the long run. In so far as Snape > can't distinguish the right path, however, I don't think he deserves > to be punished for not choosing it. > If one means "fault" in the sense of "structural defect" (i.e. there's a fault in the concrete, there's a fault in Snape's mental make-up) which does NOT imply responsibility but rather implies pathology or disease almost totally beyond the control of the one afflicted, then punishment for the fault PER SE would not be appropriate. However, punishment definitely WOULD still be appropriate for the behaviors and attitudes influenced by the fault. Snape may have a sadistic personality. That in no way releases him from punishment for his sadistic acts and attitudes toward Harry. Unless, of course, he could be claimed to be so psychotic as to have absolutely no responsbility whatsoever (i.e. if he thought he was being snarky to a tree rather than a student). However, he is definitely not psychotic and therefore punishment applies. However, there is another meaning of fault, that is with regard to mental and spiritual defects over which one has a great deal of control. Snape did not create his grudge, but he has nurtured it and fed it like some kind of hideous infant. For that reason, his defects are in some way his responsibility (i.e. his faults as in they are HIS FAULT), and he does deserve to be punished for them. Lupinlore From david_p at istop.com Tue Apr 12 01:36:27 2005 From: david_p at istop.com (david_p2002ca) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 01:36:27 -0000 Subject: FILK: The Boy Who Lived Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127442 It is indeed fortunate that Hogwarts has the Room of Requirements; for that night when Harry felt a need to express himself in song, shortly after Professor Umbridge's putsch, he merely had to turn around and found a beautiful baby grand piano waiting for him. (To the tune of Billy Joel's "Piano Man") It's held in the room of requirements When Hermione's Galleons get hot Bewitched them by casting a Protean charm NEWT magic, believe it or not She said "Harry please teach us some real DA 'Cause Umbridge does nothing at all But we know that He's back And He soon may attack The Wizard World soon in his thrall." La la la, de de da La la, de de da da da Chorus: Teach us a spell, you're the Boy Who Lived Teach us a spell tonight 'Cause we all know the Dark Lord has come again And we will be ready to fight Now Ron's always stuck with old hand-me-downs He gets nothing that is new But he likes a good joke And he's quite a good bloke But he's wond'ring what he will do. He says "Harry I'm tired of poverty." As the smile ran away from his face "My brothers were head boys and quidditch stars What's left for me in this place?" Oh, la la la, de de da La la, de de da da da Chorus Now Neville's the offspring of two aurors Who we sometimes think is a Squib And he's duelling with Harry Though he finds these things scary To get Grandma to lay off the bib. And Cho Chang brought in some outsider girl Who does not seem to fit in at all Though she swears that her friend is innocuous I think that Cho messed up this call. Chorus It's a pretty good crowd in the new DA And Hermione gives out with a smile 'Cause she knows we'll soon be Fighting with old Lord V And his DEs that fill us with bile. And Dobby appears in full panic mode As the new DA scatters for miles And Umbridge unfair grabs the Hogwarts chair While Dumbledore flees but with style. Oh, la la la, de de da La la, de de da da da Chorus David (back into lurk mode) From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 12 01:57:11 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 01:57:11 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127443 imamommy: Also, detectors seem to have only a vague degree of accuracy. When Harry is disciplined for the violet pudding incident, for example, the MoM can only pinpoint that it happened at his house. They can't actually say with certainty who did it, or they would have known it was Dobby. This is further evidenced by the Weasleys; I think F&G have been cooking stuff up in their bedroom for a while, and they definitely jinx the "Bighead Boy" badge while at the Leaky Cauldron.... Bookworm: imamommy said most of what I was going to say. The only thing I have to add is that the Dursley's house is probably monitored more closely than, say, Dean Thomas' house, simply because of who Harry is. I started to compare it to Hermione's house, but I'm not so sure about that. Because Hermione is best friends with Harry, the Order may have put some protections around her parents to prevent them from becoming hostages. Ravenclaw Bookworm From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 02:10:13 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 02:10:13 -0000 Subject: Hermione as Stategist (was: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127444 >>sherry: >do you truly see hermione as a brilliant planner and strategist? i have never thought of her in that way, and i would love to hear your thoughts on that.< Betsy: When Hermione sets herself to a task, she usually gets it done, and in a rather efficient fashion. There's the Polyjuice scheme in CoS, where she figures out the goal, the components, and the method while Ron and Harry are still throwing out random theories. She does a similar thing at the end of PoA with the time turner. IIRC, Hermione figures out most of Dumbledore's hints, and generally directs her and Harry's path. (Could be some movie contamination sneaking in there.) And of course there's the Rita Skeeter fun in GoF. OotP is where Hermione's particular skills shine. She comes up with the DA (a perfect way to take on Umbridge), and figures out how to keep the group neatly under the radar. She comes up with a plan, totally on the fly, to get Harry out of Umbridge's clutches, and does a pretty good job of trying to stall Harry until some sense kicks in. Her treatment of Umbridge was coldly ruthless - but efficiency and ruthlessness often go hand in hand (at least in the books I read *eg*), and Hermione was working under a pretty intense time crunch. Even more impressively, Hermione recognizes the signs of Voldemort's plan. I think, because she's got a similar strategic way of thinking she can tell that something's not quite right about Harry's dream. She knows what *she'd* do if she was Voldemort, and so she gets suspicious. What Hermione is *not* very good at is getting people to listen to her. When she's dealing with Ron and Harry they tend to go along with her, because they trust her brilliance. (And even with them it took a while, and some fairly extreme circumstances, for Hermione to win them over.) Though, there are several occasions were Ron and Harry are visibly humoring Hermione. They went through the polyjuice scheme expecting each step to fail. I think they were quite surprised when it worked. SPEW is another perfect example. Hermione's plan is a good one. Create awareness with Hogwarts students, desseminating her ideas throughout the British WW; free the Hogwarts' house-elves, creating an army of rights demanding rebels; and, I imagine, start bringing pressure to bare on the Ministry with the support of like-minded witches and wizards and newly empowered house-elves. Big problem is, no one listens to her. Not even fellow Muggle-borns, who should be expected to have at least a small amount of similar revulsion at the idea of an enslaved race, join SPEW. Hermione can throw a great party, but she can't get anyone to come. Betsy From chrissilein at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 05:18:50 2005 From: chrissilein at yahoo.com (LadyOfThePensieve) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 05:18:50 -0000 Subject: Will Trelawney die? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127445 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mfterman" wrote: > > > My own feeling is that Trelawney has one more prophecy in her about > the showdown between Harry and Voldemort, which she will give in book > six, afterwards she's pretty much a dead woman walking. She might even > be killed in the middle of her prediction in case Voldemort is hearing > something that he doesn't like. She's a fairly minor character and her > death won't disrupt things too much. That?s not nice of you. There are several "minor characters" who already died in book 4 and 5. But all these death were important for the plot of the storyline. There is a meaning with the death of a character. Cheers. From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Mon Apr 11 06:53:55 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 06:53:55 -0000 Subject: Getting out of the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127446 tinglinger wrote: > That said, does anyone have any ideas what would > happen if Snape's memory as stored in the pensieve > somehow ended and Harry was still inside? > Would Harry have been able to get out on his own? > In the two instances where Harry "fell into" the > ensieve, he was "pulled out" before the memories > were complete. Just curious.... mz_annethrope: Oooooh! Cool question! I can think of a couple of possible clues. 1) When Harry falls into Dumbledore's thoughts in GoF, he goes from one thought to another in rapid succession. He would do the same thing in Snape's thoughts. So far we don't know if he ever tries to will himself out or if there is some way he can magic himself out. Otherwise I can think of two possibilities. One is that he falls out at the end of all of Snape's or Dumbledore's thoughts. The other is that the thoughts present a continuous loop and Harry is stuck unless he is able to magic himself out. My suspicion is that he is stuck. One reason for this is that in OotP, Hermione identifies as "time" the DE head in the bell jar, that rapidly turns from grown man's head to baby head and back. If Hermione is correct, then JKR has a cyclical NeoPlatonist or Origenist notion of time. Note that there are also time turners in the Room of Time. Hermione is able to get back to the present by using a time turner because she goes back to a specified point in the past, and time goes forward. Why no loop? Because the turning of the time turner works to limit the progress of time. It acts as a control. (Or perhaps it acts as a control on perception of time, but that gets nasty.) But in the pensieve there may be no way forward and out because there is no continuous connection between the thoughts in the pensieve and the present, except for the person who puts in the thoughts. There may be two Harrys when he falls into the pensieve; one fallen and the other unconscious (I'm tempted to say souless), standing on the floor. Since the people in the memories cannot see Harry there may be a mind-body separation: Harry's body in Snape's room, his mind in the pensieve. 2) The other possibility I can think of is to relate the pensieve to Riddle's Diary. Harry (and presumably Ginny) is able enter the Diary because Diary!Tom lets him. It is not clear how Harry gets out of the Diary (it's on p. 247 of the American edition), but his return to his bed doesn't seem to be under Harry's volition. Had it been, Harry probably would have stayed on and perhaps discovered that Hagrid was innocent. Which is exactly why Diary!Tom cuts short the memory. Since Snape doesn't expect Harry to snoop in the pensieve he doesn't use a spell to force Harry out. But he wills it (by brute force). Here the will of the thinker acts as the control on time. It's possible that Harry's will is constricted or absent by his being in the pensieve or the diary. That's not so when he uses the time turner, but in that case the control was around his and Hermione's necks and instead of being trapped in a memory they were creating time. Can JKR be an Origenist and a Co-Creationist at the same time? mz_annethrope From DANCERWH86 at aol.com Tue Apr 12 01:12:05 2005 From: DANCERWH86 at aol.com (DANCERWH86 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2005 21:12:05 -0400 Subject: The Trio as Leaders (was Harry as Leader) In-Reply-To: <1113266589.11978.77683.m22@yahoogroups.com> References: <1113266589.11978.77683.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C70D13C656FC6A-CD4-1CA60@mblk-r31.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127447 > Betsy Wrote: > But Harry's gang lasts longer than the Order memembers do, and > they put some serious hurt on a few of the Death Eaters before > they're taken down. Not bad for a panicked teenager and his > group of Hogwarts weirdos. Hermione is definitely the planner; > she's also the ideas gal. But anytime she tries to get support > for her cause, she fails rather miserably. (SPEW, anyone?) > Harry comes up with a hairbrained scheme to storm the MoM, and > he gets people *begging* to come along. Now *that's* leadership. <<>> Lindsay: Hermione is not a brilliant planner or strategist. She merely thinks with her head when many others such as Harry think with their hearts. There is nothing wrong with this by any means. That's part of what makes Harry so successful, following his heart. It has also proved to be a weakness. I think Harry is of all of the trio the most reluctant to lead and the one most readily thrown into that position. Ron has never really led nor has he had to but I don't doubt that he would (he is a Gryffindor after all). Harry's celebrity I don't think hurts his cause. I'd rather follow the Boy Who Lived, the one person who survived Voldemort directly than follow some unknown who good ideas. I think in that respect Hermione is more well known for being not the easiest to get along with know it all. So naturally people look at her causes much the way people in real life look at the causes of people like her. It's just another cause ala Save the Rainforest. It's a good cause, but it can be overkilled by the wrong personality. Harry isn't overly charming or charismatic, but he seems nice enough and he has a past that is rather flashy (though not by choice). So none of them are brilliant leaders as far as I can see. To me it's almost as if the trio creates its own single leader from attributes of all three. Hermione's the brain, Harry's the figure head and Ron is the follower/fighter. In that way, they as a unit are able to do great things. Now Harry is starting to shy away from his friends for fear of hurting him. Losing this unit will likely hurt the cause. It will be staying together that allows them all to succeed. Lindsay From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Tue Apr 12 07:37:27 2005 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 00:37:27 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How will Harry kill LV In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1821384774.20050412003727@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127448 Saturday, April 9, 2005, 3:31:57 AM, Jim Ferer wrote: JF> Harry wouldn't have to give up his contact with the wizarding world. JF> Muggles can be seen in Diagon Alley - Hermione's parents do it - and JF> I'm guessing that once you've seen Diagon Alley you always see it. JF> There's Squibs in wizard places, like Filch and Arabella Figg [we see JF> her in the Ministry]. Harry would be more like them, not like a total JF> Muggle. Me: There's even a precident for Muggles setting foot in Hogwarts -- Namely, Myrtle's parents. JF> Harry's struggle after it was all over would be to find a purpose JF> again, to not just step through the Veil as he seemed wont to do in JF> the Ministry. The reaction to the end of all this would be terrible. JF> Again, love for all his friends, perhaps most for one of them, would JF> save him. That will all happen after book 7 ends, maybe. Me: My guess is that the biggest blow to Harry would be the loss of the ability to fly -- Unless he adapted to flying on something else, like Buckbeak?? Wouldn't be funny if Voldemort was actually vanquished in Book 6, and Book 7 was all about how Magic-less!Harry learns to cope? (*Astronomically* unlikely, but interesting to ponder...) JF> If I was in Harry's shoes, I wouldn't want to have my JF> memories obliterated. Me: Nor would I -- It makes me think of the movie _Ninotchka_, when Greta Garbo is forced to leave Paris and return to the oppressive Soviet regime, she nonetheless revels in the fact that, "At least they can't censor our memories!" -- Dave From josturgess at eircom.net Tue Apr 12 07:58:16 2005 From: josturgess at eircom.net (mooseming) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 07:58:16 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127449 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" > wrote: >While I can see why some would think > of > > > Snape as having some Narcissistic characteristics, I would not > > > diagnose him with this. > Julie > (By the way, in case anyone was wondering, I am a Clinical > Psychologist.) If, just for discussions sake, we propose that Snape has some characteristics but is not clinically Narcissistic, then I was wondering if Snape rolled into your office one day (very unlikely I'm sure!) what would you do to address his narcissistic tendencies? What does he need to do to balance out as it were? Also, in terms of HP plot what event would be most likely to influence his self image, arrogance and inability to empathise with others? Regards Jo From sylviablundell at aol.com Tue Apr 12 09:12:15 2005 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (ladyramkin2001) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:12:15 -0000 Subject: Is Tonks Irish? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127450 Her favourite expression, "Wotcher" sounds moreLondon than Irish to me. Sylvia From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Tue Apr 12 07:42:43 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 07:42:43 -0000 Subject: Home-Schooling in the Wizard World (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127451 Greenfirespike wrote: > After following several wonderful threads from the past week, a > question began to reemerge regarding education within the WW. > Are any wizards home-schooled? > In summation . > I just wanted to put out a few of the major options that exist > to explain alternatives to a Hogwarts education. I believe that > most magical children attend Hogwarts, and the home-schooled > magical child is rare indeed. Excellent discussion - thank you! What's always puzzled me is the absence (canon - JKR in an interview) of a wizarding university - and, we must therefore assume, a technical training college, centre for sporting excellence, evening courses to upgrade one's rusty memories of Charms and Potions forty years on, etc. What do adult wizards and witches do to qualify for employment? How do they enjoy themselves in their spare time? Do they read for pleasure? If all they get are the newspapers we know about, they must be very slow readers ... and the wireless doesn't seem too appealing either. I really do feel sorry for them! And this is Britain, remember - land of the evening course, the Women's Institute, the harvest festival vegetable competition, the choir practice and the charity fundraising tea. Their lives are surely not empty ... but I'd love to know how they are filled. Deborah From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Tue Apr 12 12:01:10 2005 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:01:10 -0000 Subject: FILK: Granger in Paradise Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127452 Granger in Paradise To the tune of Stranger In Paradise from the musical Kismet, by Robert Wright & George Forrest (with an assist from Alexander Borodin) MIDI at: http://www.hamienet.com/cat348.html Dedicated to all librarians on HP4GU THE SCENE: Hogwarts Library, as a rhapsodic HERMIONE, enters her very favorite place on earth HERMIONE Oh, see all the shelves Of the library swell With majestic old tomes And see how I'm bright `n' hale singing With joy in my library home For in my most studious season There's no where else I'd rather go Oh, it's paradise now It is truly an Eden >From which I'll not roam . With this card I'm a Granger in paradise Who'll read ev'ry sage and bard Whilst ranging through paradise As I stand Dewey-eyed I shall conjure so fair and nice With volumes that will provide Magic FAQs I'm all agog And quite addicted By ev'ry catalog Wond'rous and rare Soon I'll unfog All that's restricted Until I've read Ev'ry book that is there Here is answered the prayers solemn Of a Granger for paradise Be off with your Ron and Krum My ship is for scholarship Just open to any page No estrangement could e'er entice The fountain of knowledge is Where Granger shall sip! During the instrumental bridge, MADAM PINCE attempts to quell HERMIONE'S musical disturbance PINCE: Your voice so booms You'll be evicted Back to your common room Straight through the door HERMIONE & PINCE That would spell doom If I'm/you're convicted PINCE: Unless you can HERMIONE Unless somehow I can PINCE: Keep it down to a roar HERMIONE Keep it down to a roar PINCE: Golden silence must be observed Says this strange elder pedagogue HERMIONE Don't let me be underserved Or of manuscripts run out HERMIONE & PINCE: But open my/your mouth no more Or exchange songs that I've/you've devised And then maybe I/you will be A Gtranger in doubt! - CMC (who also gets rhapsodic when entering a first-class library) HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From heos at virgilio.it Tue Apr 12 12:56:49 2005 From: heos at virgilio.it (chrusotoxos) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 12:56:49 -0000 Subject: Worst Memory for Whom? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127453 Hi everyone! I just read the latest North Tower Editorial on Mugglenet, and I wanted to know if anyone out there does agree with it. I mean, the memory of Snape's 5th year was his own worst memory or the worst Harry could see (because it would undermine his love for his father James)? Is Snape so devious? Did he really leave that memory behind for Harry to see? Thanks, see you Chrusotoxos From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 13:20:37 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 06:20:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Snape nice or good? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050412132037.561.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127454 --- nrenka wrote: > > What I would disagree on is the (perhaps implied--correct me if I > am wrong) labeling of everyday behavior as belonging to the > superficial. It matters what one does in the grand scheme of > things, but you can't > completely separate that out from the everyday actions taken. It's > not like anyone operates on a strict split of everyday actions as > opposed to Big Important War Actions. I did not label everyday behaviour as superficial, at least not in the way you're implying. What I said (and I thought I was clear) was that what you see on the surface can be different from what a person is really like. Lockhart is a pleasant nice person in public but is a supremely selfish cowardly person inside and the public display is strictly camouflage. If you're going to consider everyday behaviour then you have to consider ALL the everyday behaviour. With regards to Snape, his utter gittishness is what we see in public and a lot of readers, especially the younger ones, stop right there. JKR is counting on this of course because "who's side is he on?" is a great source of red herrings and plot tension. But since we're analyzing his character we don't want to stop there. And there's a fair amount of evidence that Snape's everyday behaviour actually does reflect what's inside and what's inside is more than just gittishness. Harry's POV doesn't really go into too much depth with Snape except to assume that Snape is mean just for meanness sake. Snape pops up to stop fights in the corridors because he's a mean teacher who likes to take off points (Harry's POV). But in a school where teachers seem oblivious to bullying, there might be a deeper reason for Snape's activities in this regard - he knows what its like to be bullied, even though he despises his weaker younger self and those who are bullied in the present day. I think this is the real reason for his comment about Hermione's teeth ("I see no difference"); he will intervene to stop bullying (or his perception of it) but if a victim were to come whining to him for help he'd be contemptuous. And while Hermione didn't come to him, Ron and Harry did on her behalf. Snape despises victims, starting with his younger self. Victims deserve whatever they get. But while he despises victims, Snape really HATES bullies who abuse their power and don't obey the rules. People like James and Sirius who pick on other less popular kids and get away with it because they're charming and bright and are socially attuned enough to present themselves well to teachers and parents. And people like Voldemort who held out the promise of a better world than the flawed one teen!Snape lived in where rules mattered and it didn't matter if you were popular or good at Quidditch as long as you obeyed the rules and worked hard. Voldemort turned out to be nothing more than the biggest bully of all, who attacked even his own supporters to keep them in line and who perpetuated wanton, senseless destruction, who had no intention of ever allowing anything to grow or develop or thrive in his presence. So to return to the subject line: yes, Snape is good - because he knows what it's like to be really bad and he rejected it. He's not nice but niceness ain't going to win any battles against DE's. Molly's nice but her idea of preparing kids for the battle ahead is worse than useless. Nice is pleasant but good is tougher. Magda (amused by the lecturing tone of some recent posts) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 13:23:27 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 06:23:27 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Looking past the superficial (was: Is Snape nice or good?) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050412132327.11592.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127455 --- cubfanbudwoman wrote: > I do hope you would include Snape in the category of people who > need to learn to look past the superficial and into the real person > before judging them? Well I didn't exclude or include anyone, really. Harry has to learn the lesson because he's the hero of the series, but of course all the characters could use a lesson or two in the same thing. Magda (note to elves: this was a two line reponse) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From Vivamus at TaprootTech.com Tue Apr 12 13:56:39 2005 From: Vivamus at TaprootTech.com (Vivamus) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:56:39 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione as Stategist (was: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <200504120957239.SM00900@devbox> No: HPFGUIDX 127456 > >>sherry: > >do you truly see Hermione as a brilliant planner and strategist? I > have never thought of her in that way, and I would love to > hear your thoughts on that.< > > Betsy: > Her treatment of Umbridge was coldly ruthless - but > efficiency and ruthlessness often go hand in hand (at least > in the books I read *e.g.*), and Hermione was working under a > pretty intense time crunch. Vivamus: I would agree that it was cold, but I would also argue that it was entirely ethical of her to do that to DU. DU had just admitted to sending DEs to suck the soul out of Hermione's best friend, AND she was about to start gleefully torturing him with the Cruciatus curse, which Hermione knows was enough to permanently derange Neville's parents. DU was clearly revealed in that moment as a person no less evil than LV, despite the fact that she probably thought of herself as working for the greater good. I think Hermione did a simply brilliant job of finding the most efficient method of toad control available. In fact, there *was* one group she was ruthless to, and that was the centaurs. She was every bit as arrogant as they accused her of being, in using them to get rid of DU for her. It was still worth doing, but notice that, with all her brilliance, she DIDN'T have the sense to keep her mouth shut when the centaurs started to get angry at her attitude. > Betsy: > Even more impressively, Hermione recognizes the signs of > Voldemort's plan. I think, because she's got a similar > strategic way of thinking she can tell that something's not > quite right about Harry's dream. > She knows what *she'd* do if she was Voldemort, and so she > gets suspicious. Vivamus: I think you are right. It's about logic and efficiency, and she and LV are both very good at that. > Betsy: > What Hermione is *not* very good at is getting people to > listen to her. > SPEW is another perfect example. Hermione's plan is a good one. > Create awareness with Hogwarts students, disseminating her > ideas throughout the British WW; free the Hogwarts' > house-elves, creating an army of rights demanding rebels; > and, I imagine, start bringing pressure to bare on the > Ministry with the support of like-minded witches and wizards > and newly empowered house-elves. Big problem is, no one > listens to her. Not even fellow Muggle-borns, who should be > expected to have at least a small amount of similar revulsion > at the idea of an enslaved race, join SPEW. Hermione can > throw a great party, but she can't get anyone to come. > > Betsy Vivamus: Hermione shows an interesting dichotomy when it comes to understanding others, doesn't she? On the one hand, she seems to have a solid grasp of what others are feeling, even when that is very complex (such as her explanation of Cho's feelings to Harry in OOtP.) On the other, what others are feeling doesn't seem to connect inside her head with the fact that HER reality may not be the same as someone ELSE's reality. The Centaurs get angry at her arrogance, so she starts lecturing them on why they shouldn't be angry with her -- oops. Everyone from Dobby to Hagrid tells her she doesn't understand the House Elves, and she hears them all, but she plows on ahead with her (well-constructed) plans for SPEW as if they hadn't spoken. Harry keeps telling her not to try to run his life, but she can't help insisting he must not only see things her way, but decide them the way she would decide them, and she causes him significant trouble by doing so, on several occasions. I see this all as a reflection of her character that you describe so well. Her mind is orderly and logical, so she really doesn't understand why someone should see anything differently. If they do, she just has to explain things and they will change -- just as she thinks she would, if she didn't understand something and it was explained to her. It never occurs to her either that the assumptions may be different, or that one can make a "right" choice that isn't logical, or even that one has the *right* to make a choice that isn't logical (or doesn't seem so to her.) What worries me in what we saw in OOtP about Hermione's strategy, is that she hasn't really figured out yet that they are in a war, and the price of losing is the freedom of the entire world, wizard and muggle both. When she does, I'm sure she will explain it to the others, but it had better be soon, or kids doing jelly legs and tarantalegra against AKs are going to be very messily slaughtered. It's one thing to play fair, but there are times when combat rules need to take over, and combat has nothing to do with fair or proper or nice. Vivamus From nrenka at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 15:40:33 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:40:33 -0000 Subject: Is Snape nice or good? In-Reply-To: <20050412132037.561.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127457 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: > I did not label everyday behaviour as superficial, at least not in > the way you're implying. What I said (and I thought I was clear) > was that what you see on the surface can be different from what a > person is really like. Lockhart is a pleasant nice person in > public but is a supremely selfish cowardly person inside and the > public display is strictly camouflage. If you're going to consider > everyday behaviour then you have to consider ALL the everyday > behaviour. I would agree with this--although I would say the problem is that Lockhart is insincere in his daily behavior, which makes it a slightly different valuation. The question that I am deeply conflicted on and don't think there's enough canon to decide about is how sincere Snape is, in some of his actions. And let me clear up one thing; I was thinking of everyday behavior as opposed to something like behavior towards a specific mission/goal/whatever. That's a distinction I would like to make because the defense is made for Snape that "Oh, it doesn't matter so much how he behaves in the classroom because he's out risking his life on missions". Exceptional behavior as opposed to general habitus. I'm suggesting there are ways of thinking about ethics that are not so interested in that kind of distinction. I'm not sure if canon is tilting to one or the other, yet. > Snape despises victims, starting with his younger self. Victims > deserve whatever they get. > > But while he despises victims, Snape really HATES bullies who abuse > their power and don't obey the rules. Then what this gets at is: why is Snape a bully himself? I'm willing to buy the authorial voice here as to the "teacher who abuses his authority", because one has to rationalize too many things away to clear him of that charge (while making it clear that he is certainly not Umbridge, either). Perhaps he rationalizes that since he is in authority, to some extent he is the embodiment of the rules and thus cannot be breaking them as a student bully would be. Snape is certainly somewhat biased in his enforcement of codes of conduct, going easy on Draco Malfoy, refusing to note the Gryffindor Quidditch player hexed by the Slytherins despite all the witnesses. If he were fully equal-opportunity, this wouldn't bother me (and I suspect others) as much as it does. But even with the Harry's POV filter, there's some strong bias going on. There may well be objective reasons for it. It will be interesting to see how it meshes with whatever he's doing for the Order, which we have no idea what it actually is. > So to return to the subject line: yes, Snape is good - because he > knows what it's like to be really bad and he rejected it. He's not > nice but niceness ain't going to win any battles against DE's. > Molly's nice but her idea of preparing kids for the battle ahead is > worse than useless. I'd say that's a false dichotomy, and there's an excluded middle walking around here somewhere. Nice isn't necessarily going to win battles against the DEs, but cooperation amongst members of the Order is--and civil, acceptible behavior towards people is a large part of building that cohesion. Being demanding does not require being nasty, as McGonagall proves to us. One does not have to be either Snape or Molly, after all. -Nora turns the pages and reads through the Hours From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 17:15:45 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:15:45 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione as Stategist (was: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned?) In-Reply-To: <200504120957239.SM00900@devbox> Message-ID: <20050412171545.1054.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127458 > Betsy: > SPEW is another perfect example. Hermione's plan is a good one. > Create awareness with Hogwarts students, disseminating her > ideas throughout the British WW; free the Hogwarts' > house-elves, creating an army of rights demanding rebels; > and, I imagine, start bringing pressure to bare on the > Ministry with the support of like-minded witches and wizards > and newly empowered house-elves. Big problem is, no one > listens to her. Not even fellow Muggle-borns, who should be > expected to have at least a small amount of similar revulsion > at the idea of an enslaved race, join SPEW. Hermione can > throw a great party, but she can't get anyone to come. Ah, Hermione! The typical teenager discovering (gasp!) that the world isn't just. Hermione's problem with SPEW isn't her intentions; it's her infantilizing of the house elves. She can relate to their situation only if she can see them as victims who need her help. Not surprisingly the elves don't see themselves as victims in their situation as elves (although they'd probably agree that individual elves often get a rotten deal from their masters). When it comes to creatures that are obviously not victims like centaurs, Hermione's sensitivity takes a vacation. Something that is very common with teens, I hasten to add; I have spent my career in the charitable sector and JKR's portrayal of Hermione is so perfect that it makes my teeth hurt. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 18:54:23 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 18:54:23 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127459 > > If, just for discussions sake, we propose that Snape has some > characteristics but is not clinically Narcissistic, then I was > wondering if Snape rolled into your office one day (very unlikely > I'm sure!) what would you do to address his narcissistic tendencies? > What does he need to do to balance out as it were? > > Also, in terms of HP plot what event would be most likely to > influence his self image, arrogance and inability to empathise with > others? > > Regards > Jo Very interesting question. I must admit, while reading the books I did not have my "shrink hat" on, so I am having to think about these things differently. I see Snape as wounded, and his behaviors, etc., as defenses rather than as his "character." From the brief glimpse into his childhood to his adolescence, Severus has been a pained person. Even his name conjures pain for me ("sever us"). I would speak to his vulnerability. This is why I see him as very different form Lucious Malfoy. DD trusts Snape implicitly. Why? Perhaps it is because he knows much more about him (background, etc) than we know and he knows his character, not just his presentation. There is something redeeming about Severus, vague and indefinable but redeeming. This is where you have to distinguish between "content" and "process." Content is the subject matter; process is the underlying thread that ties the content together. Yes, Severus BEHAVES in ways that may seem narcissistic. Is that content (at the behavioral level) or is that process (at the character level)? My view is that this is at the content level...what he does, rather than at the process level...who he is. Let me give you an example of the difference in diagnosis and prognosis for therapy. As I mentioned in my earlier post, personality disorders are coded on Axis II. This axis is reserved for two diagnostic categories only: personality disorders and mental retardation. Let's say a mentally retarded person is in therapy. No one would expect pyschotherapy to increase their IQ to average. Why? Intelligence is not amenable to change. The same way with personality disorders. Psychotherapy with Snape would be a significantly different process than with Lucious. Julie From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 19:08:19 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:08:19 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127460 Julie: Very interesting question. I must admit, while reading the books I did not have my "shrink hat" on, so I am having to think about these things differently. I see Snape as wounded, and his behaviors, etc., as defenses rather than as his "character." This is where you have to distinguish between "content" and "process." Content is the subject matter; process is the underlying thread that ties the content together. Yes, Severus BEHAVES in ways that may seem narcissistic. Is that content (at the behavioral level) or is that process (at the character level)? My view is that this is at the content level...what he does, rather than at the process level...who he is. Alla: Julie, thank for your insight, but I think I have a follow-up question. Right now, on the limited information we know about Snape you seem to agree that he behaves in the ways that seems narcissistic, correct? Y Are you saying that he is just pretending and the narcissistic traits of his personality is just a mask to the world and if yes, what are you basing this conclusion on? Would you have diagnosed Snape with narcissism, if you knew that you will learn no more information about him than we know now? Thank you, Alla From rowanbrookt at hotmail.com Tue Apr 12 19:23:33 2005 From: rowanbrookt at hotmail.com (rowanbrookt) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:23:33 -0000 Subject: Basillisk Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127461 I was re-reading HPATCOS last night and wondered how did Salazar Slytherin plan for the basillisk to only kill muggle born witches and wizards. Surely the basillisk would just kill anyone who happened to look at it as it searched for muggle borns. The book does say that Ginny controlled by Tom riddle was setting the basillisk on muggle borns specifically, but that doesn't seen satisfactory to me. Any ideas? From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 19:37:32 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:37:32 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD (long response) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127462 > > Alla: > > Julie, thank for your insight, but I think I have a follow-up > question. > > Right now, on the limited information we know about Snape you seem to > agree that he behaves in the ways that seems narcissistic, correct? Y > > Are you saying that he is just pretending and the narcissistic traits > of his personality is just a mask to the world and if yes, what are > you basing this conclusion on? > > Would you have diagnosed Snape with narcissism, if you knew that you > will learn no more information about him than we know now? > > Thank you, > > Alla These are great but difficult questions to answer. Part of the reason they are difficult is the inexact science of mental health. Some of what I base my opinion is 10+ years of practice and the "instinct" if you will that develops from this. I would not diagnose him as Narcissistic PD because I do not think this is who he is as a person at the core of his being. In the HP series, we see Severus from Harry's point of view and Harry does not like him. We do not know that he lacks empathy. We know he was once a death eater, but we know FOR SOME REASON that DD trusts him. We do not know that reason because that has not been shared. A dark character..absolutely. Not very nice and friendly...agreed. But lacking in empathy? That I don't know. I would not be surprised if his empathy is what made him turn from being a DE and this is what DD knows/sees in Severus. Again, this is purely speculation, but based on how I have read the books, this has been my interpretation. In an earlier post (#127435), I mentioned why I would diagnose Lucious Malfoy with Narcissistic PD. I will try the same approach and why I do not see Severus as such. I will refer to the diagnostic criteria in abbreviated form...for an unabbreviated list, see post #127435. Narcissistic Personality Disorder is "a pervasive pattern of grandiosity...need for admiration...and a lack of empathy." 1. Grandiose sense of self-importance --> I do not see him as exaggerating his achievements versus his abilities. He is an accomplished wizard, particularly in potions, and he is confident in this. I do not see him as particularly grandiose, nor do I see him as humble. I think his lack of humility is what people see as "grandiose." Personally, I think his achievements are very commensurate with his abilities. 2. Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, etc --> I see him as longing to have power, ideal love, etc., but not occupied with the fantasies of already having it (which is what is meant by this criteria). 3. Believes he is "special"...--> This may be what underlies his suport for Slytherin and contempt of the other houses. However, the other heads of houses may favor their houses as well, just not as obviously as Severus. Again, we are seeing this from Harry's point of view. 4. Requires excessive admiration --> Not sure about this. I don't see him acting "chummy" with Draco, just not as contemptable toward him as Harry. Not sure what impact excessive admiration would have on Severus. He does seem to be loyal to DD, but I would think this is because he feels loyalty toward DD and not because DD excessively admires him. 5. Has a sense of entitlement --> He expects to be treated with respect by the students because he is a professor. I don't see this as entitlement. I would think Minerva would not act to kindly if students treated her with disrespect. The difference is she is seen as a warmer and more likeable person, even though just as strict as Severus. 6. In interpersonally exploitative --> I have not read anything in canon that would support this. 7. Lack empathy --> See my first paragraph of this post 8. Often envious of others --> Did seem envious of the Marauders in the pensive. 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes --> I'd agree with this. So, in this analysis, Severus possibly meets 2 criteria, less than the 5 required for the diagnosis. Granted, he is not nice, not warm and fuzzy, and not tops on my list to invite to a dinner party. However, I would not diagnose him with NPD. If he were a client of mine,I probably would keep it in the back of my mind and see how the therapy plays out, but would not diagnose him based on the information at hand. Thanks for the discussion! Julie From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Tue Apr 12 19:44:55 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 15:44:55 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Basillisk Message-ID: <62.52c10366.2f8d7f37@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127463 In a message dated 4/12/2005 12:30:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, rowanbrookt at hotmail.com writes: I was re-reading HPATCOS last night and wondered how did Salazar Slytherin plan for the basillisk to only kill muggle born witches and wizards. Surely the basillisk would just kill anyone who happened to look at it as it searched for muggle borns. The book does say that Ginny controlled by Tom riddle was setting the basillisk on muggle borns specifically, but that doesn't seen satisfactory to me. Any ideas? ******************************************* Chancie: A Basilisk is, basically, a snake. Salazar Slytherin spoke Parsel tongue, just as Tom Riddle and of course Harry can. The CoS was to be opened by someone who could also speak Parsel tongue, or else they wouldn't be able to open the chamber at all. This ability allowed Tom the ability to control the basilisk. Is that what you were looking for, or did you have some other wonderings? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 16:27:53 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:27:53 -0000 Subject: Hermione as Stategist (was: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned?) In-Reply-To: <200504120957239.SM00900@devbox> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127464 Vivamus wrote: > Hermione shows an interesting dichotomy when it comes to understanding > others, doesn't she? On the one hand, she seems to have a solid grasp of > what others are feeling, even when that is very complex (such as her > explanation of Cho's feelings to Harry in OOtP.) On the other, what others > are feeling doesn't seem to connect inside her head with the fact that HER > reality may not be the same as someone ELSE's reality. [examples snipped] > > I see this all as a reflection of her character that you describe so well. > Her mind is orderly and logical, so she really doesn't understand why > someone should see anything differently. If they do, she just has to > explain things and they will change -- just as she thinks she would, if she > didn't understand something and it was explained to her. It never occurs > to her either that the assumptions may be different, or that one can make a > "right" choice that isn't logical, or even that one has the *right* to make > a choice that isn't logical (or doesn't seem so to her.) mz_annethrope: Great analysis. It's an interesting dichotomy indeed and I don't find it entirely believable. Hermione is a true creature of the Enlightenment. For her the human mind, in the form of reason, is the point of departure for all knowledge. She separates subject from object (the environment can be analyzed as something external from the human mind) which allows her to analyze some one else in supposedly "objective" fashion. So how can she come up with an intuitive response to some one she doesn't seem to know very well, and who is so different from her? She doesn't seem to be able to do it with Luna. I suspect the author simply needed some one to tell Harry what was going on, and that some one as usual happened to be Hermione. She could have a source. Ginny probably knows a lot of the school gossip and Hermione could have heard it from her. Vivamus: > What worries me in what we saw in OOtP about Hermione's strategy, is that > she hasn't really figured out yet that they are in a war, and the price of > losing is the freedom of the entire world, wizard and muggle both. When she > does, I'm sure she will explain it to the others, but it had better be soon, > or kids doing jelly legs and tarantalegra against AKs are going to be very > messily slaughtered. It's one thing to play fair, but there are times when > combat rules need to take over, and combat has nothing to do with fair or > proper or nice. mz_annethrope: No she hasn't yet figured out they are in a war. We don't really know about how aurors fight the DEs (JKR doesn't much describe their tactics in OotP and presumably they no longer have special authority to use illegal curses). Winning a battle may have less to do with the particular curses and more to do with the aptitude of the fighter. Harry, for example, is able to respond successfully to Voldemort with "Expelliarmus," but in OotP he stands around stupidly. Reaction speed, concentration, and ability to protect oneself seem to count at least as much as the spell used. That said, I agree that they'll need to be able to use longer lasting and more debilitating curses. There's also an ethical issue. These are kids fighting, and I doubt JKR is going to say it's ok for underage witches and wizards to fight in wars when it is not ok for muggle children. How old do you have to be to join the British Army? I suspect she's lowered coming of age from 18 to 17 to allow 7th year students to fight legally. I'm not expecting full fledged battles with students before that time. mz_annethrope From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Apr 12 19:53:12 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:53:12 -0000 Subject: Narcissistic!Snape (was: Whither Snape?) [long!] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127465 Nora: I find it absolutely overpoweringly ironic that Snape is furious at Dumbledore for believing Black's story, when Snape himself is on a second chance (and has most likely done worse things in the past than Black ever did; having been a DE at all is a minimum of aiding and abetting to murder). Pippin: The situations are entirely different. Sirius is not an admitted DE asking for a second chance. He's maintaining his innocence. Dumbledore himself says that Snape's version of events is far more convincing than Harry's. It is *not* illogical for Snape to continue to believe that Sirius is guilty. What Snape thinks Sirius did as a youth would be consistent with Sirius as a sociopath. Not that I think he is, but the question is relevant to whether Sirius should be believed, since a sociopath could be lying without any sign of guilt. For Snape to have allowed Hermione to continue would not have helped Sirius. Dumbledore himself says that no one would believe her; he himself cuts her off. Hermione could only succeed in incriminating herself -- and there are those close to Fudge who would be only to happy to see her expelled. Snape does not know, when he leaves the room, that Dumbledore has decided to believe Sirius. Even Harry and Hermione don't know that --they launch a desperate, breathless effort to convince him, after all. Snape still does not know that Dumbledore has decided he can believe Sirius when he later speaks to Fudge. And he still does not know it when he launches into his rant about Harry helping Sirius to escape. Now, since we don't know how much Snape knows about the Time Turner, or what he really saw by the lake (his account is inconsistent with what Harry remembers) or how much he could sense from Harry or Hermione's minds, we don't know whether his suspicion of Harry was rational or not. But we do know that Dumbledore believes it is, because he tells Fudge that Snape is not unbalanced. Since Snape still thinks at this point that Sirius is a terrorist conspirator, his anger about the escape is not irrational either. If Snape is a metaphor for the way people react to personality disorders, it might make sense for Rowling to give him some outre behaviors without having any specific diagnosis in mind, in order to make a more general point than she was with a character like Lockhart. Such as that it's easy to assume such people are being irrational when they are not. JKR might also be trying to get across that people can be incapable of stopping themselves from lesser evils while still being staunchly opposed to greater ones. Snape's not the only example in the order, just the one whose behavior is the biggest problem for Harry. It would be a lot to ask for Harry to trust Snape in spite of the way Snape treats him. But if Harry *did* trust Snape, the way Snape treats him would not, I submit, be such a problem. Harry would just say to himself, "Oh, there he goes again." Pippin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Apr 12 20:25:14 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:25:14 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD (long response) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127466 Ooooh, the fun continues! :-) Julie: > I see Snape as wounded, and his behaviors, etc., as defenses rather > than as his "character." This is why I see him as very > different form Lucious Malfoy. There is something > redeeming about Severus, vague and indefinable but redeeming. > > Yes, Severus BEHAVES in ways that may seem narcissistic. Is that > content (at the behavioral level) or is that process (at the > character level)? My view is that this is at the content > level...what he does, rather than at the process level...who he is. > > Psychotherapy with Snape would be a significantly different process > than with Lucious. SSSusan: It's interesting to note that much of what Julie is saying here is in alignment with Jim Ferer's position in 127218 re: a wounded Snape. And Julie's remarks about thereapy are also quite interesting, given what Mara (the other clinical psychologist who's weighed in) said in 127233: >>If I had to choose which of the two adults I'd rather see in my office -- I'd actually choose Snape, I think. Lockhart would be very, very hard to treat.<< So, while Mara was comparing Snape & Lockhart and Julie was comparing Snape & Lucius Malfoy, they both agree that Snape would be the preferred client. And in spite of my argument for Narcissistic! Snape, I can most decidedly see both their points on this. Julie: > I would not diagnose him as Narcissistic PD because I do not think > this is who he is as a person at the core of his being. SSSusan: I wrote to Julie offlist with my attempt at this yesterday, so I think it's only fair I play along. > Narcissistic Personality Disorder is "a pervasive pattern of > grandiosity...need for admiration...and a lack of empathy." > > 1. Grandiose sense of self-importance --> I do not see him as > exaggerating his achievements versus his abilities. SSSusan: I agree that this is an area in which we don't have canon to be certain. > 2. Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, etc --> > I see him as longing to have power, ideal love, etc., but not > occupied with the fantasies of already having it (which is what is > meant by this criteria). SSSusan: I agree that we have no way of knowing about what things Severus Snape fantasizes. > 3. Believes he is "special"...--> This may be what underlies his > suport for Slytherin and contempt of the other houses. However, > the other heads of houses may favor their houses as well, just not > as obviously as Severus. SSSusan: I'm sticking back in the rest of the description of this characteristic: "Believes he is special and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)" I do so because I think the rest of it is easier to support. His comments about "dunderheads" and about what he can show the few who understand the subtle science and exact art... could speak to this. With what we've seen, we can only compare Snape to McGonagall in terms of favoritism, and Snape's got it in spades over MM (whose broom to Harry was her one big moment of favoritism). > 4. Requires excessive admiration --> Not sure about this. I don't > see him acting "chummy" with Draco, just not as contemptable toward > him as Harry. Not sure what impact excessive admiration would have > on Severus. He does seem to be loyal to DD, but I would think this > is because he feels loyalty toward DD and not because DD > excessively admires him. SSSusan: I guess I see requiring admiration as different from wanting chumminess from students. I have seen it more along the lines of his being annoyed by "dunderheads" who don't show adequate appreciation of him or of what he is able to teach them. I see it also as his being loyal to DD in part because DD has been *appreciative* of Snape, as someone who has acknowledged his importance, which I believe he craved. > 5. Has a sense of entitlement --> He expects to be treated with > respect by the students because he is a professor. I don't see > this as entitlement. I would think Minerva would not act to kindly > if students treated her with disrespect. The difference is she is > seen as a warmer and more likeable person, even though just as > strict as Severus. SSSusan: I absolutely do see this. Snape DEMANDS to be referred to by his title. McGonagall might correct a student who didn't use the title, but would she do it with as much venom? Would she see it as a personal affront or as merely an oversight? I think Snape is very hung up on respect. "I, Severus Snape, master of this school, demand..." with the map ? now, maybe that was just how he thought he could make the map show its secrets; but maybe it was his expectation that he deserved its doing so (how *dare* it not show it to HIM!). Same thing with the "You do remember how he once tried to kill ME" line to DD. Not to mention DD's "Some wounds run too deep..." explanation to Harry about Occlumency. Clearly DD thought a typical grown man would've been over the bad history w/ James; clearly Snape is not *and* still feels he's *due* some measure of vengeance or justice or angry outlet over this. > 6. In interpersonally exploitative --> I have not read anything in > canon that would support this. SSSusan: Me either. It would be total speculation. OTOH, I think it *might* be possible to argue that anyone willing to be a Death Eater might have this attribute? > 7. Lack empathy --> In the HP series, we see Severus from Harry's > point of view and Harry does not like him. We do not know that he > lacks empathy. SSSusan: I *so* see this as one of Snape's biggies! The "I see no difference" to Hermione's growing teeth. The entire scene where Snape states to Lupin, in front of the class, that Lupin will want to watch out, as Neville Longbottom is in the class ? a total humiliation of Neville in a situation where it wasn't even his class and Neville hadn't provoked him. Also, if he were an empathetic person, might he not understand a little about the kind of life Harry has had to live, the suffering he has endured? We see absolutely *no* sign that Snape has been moved one whit by Harry's losses. I think lack of empathy is one of the most easily demonstrated aspects of Snape's character. > 8. Often envious of others --> Did seem envious of the Marauders in > the pensive. SSSusan: Yes. And, even though it's "biased" testimony, we do have that bit about Snape's having been jealous of James' Quidditch skills. One might wonder, too, about whether he was envious of Lupin as Prefect, James as Head Boy, Sirius & James' intelligence, James' "strutting about" like a BMOC. Extrapolation, some of that, but fairly believable, I'd argue. > 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes --> I'd agree > with this. SSSusan: Absolutely. I don't think even Snape apologists would disagree. > So, in this analysis, Severus possibly meets 2 criteria, less than > the 5 required for the diagnosis. Granted, he is not nice, not > warm and fuzzy, and not tops on my list to invite to a dinner > party. However, I would not diagnose him with NPD. If he were a > client of mine,I probably would keep it in the back of my mind and > see how the therapy plays out, but would not diagnose him based on > the information at hand. SSSusan: And I'm not a professional, and my counseling degree is from 15 years ago, so I should be taken with one giant grain of salt! But I come up to somewhere in the range of 4 - 6 of the requirements. I think where I'm coming down is that I do understand those who would stop short of saying Snape has NPD and would probably align myself more with Kemper's "Snape has narcissistic traits," because I do absolutely think he has several (though in no way all) of the traits. Julie: > I would not be surprised if his empathy is what made him turn from > being a DE and this is what DD knows/sees in Severus. Again, this > is purely speculation, but based on how I have read the books, this > has been my interpretation SSSusan: And it's interesting that yesterday I posted on what would be key for me in all of this: the reason Snape left Voldy & the Des. If it was empathy, then I'm with you, Julie. If it was an internal epiphany brought on by a bout of introspection, I'm definitely off the NPD! Snape bandwagon. If, however, it was because Voldy did something which Snape viewed as such an egregious personal affront that he decided to seek vengeance no matter the cost, then I'm sticking to my Narcissistic!Snape. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who hopes at least a few others are finding this as fun as she is. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 20:44:34 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:44:34 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a05041106197d4bfbaf@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127467 >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, elfundeb wrote: > > ..., Donna Harrington-Lueker faults the books for 'subtle sexism,' > maintaining that 'none of the girls or women in GoF escapes > shrillness, giddiness or fear.' Hermione is 'bossy, shrill, > exasperating and meddlesome,' 'the stereotypical good girl who > completes her work ahead of time, chides her friends fro breaking > rules and always has her hand up in class.' > > Christine Schoefer writes,'Girls, when they are not downright silly > or unlikeable, are helpers, enablers and instruments.' > > ....eedited... > > 4. Do you believe the books are male-centered? Could she have made > the books less male-centered without sacrificing the story? Is this > important to female readers? To male readers? Should it be? > > ...edited... > > Debbie bboyminn: These books are absolutely biased, there are distorted to a male perspective, and are male-centeric [period, full stop, absolute end of sentence]. Yet, how could they be other than /male-centered/ when the central point-of-view character is a male; further, a very young male? Instead of complaining that the books are male-centered, which of course they well should be, people should be marveling, as I do, that a female author could so thoroughly and accurately capture the male-mind. Speaking as a former boy (current man), JKR got it amazingly and wonderfully right. I speculate some of the things about the portrayal of girls that people don't like, are simply respresentations of the things that catch Harry's eye. Logically, the aspects of girls that catch Harry's eye are not the ways that they are the same as boys, but the way in which they are very obviously and, from a boy perspective, strangely different than boys. I don't see what the problem is, it all make perfect sense to me. Steve/bboyminn From griffin782002 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 20:44:35 2005 From: griffin782002 at yahoo.com (sp. sot.) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 13:44:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Basillisk In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050412204435.95425.qmail@web52702.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127468 rowanbrookt wrote: I was re-reading HPATCOS last night and wondered how did Salazar Slytherin plan for the basillisk to only kill muggle born witches and wizards. Surely the basillisk would just kill anyone who happened to look at it as it searched for muggle borns. The book does say that Ginny controlled by Tom riddle was setting the basillisk on muggle borns specifically, but that doesn't seen satisfactory to me. Any ideas? Well, snakes have an organ on the roof of the mouth, with which they can sense smells by touching it with the tongue. Some other snakes can see in infrared. I suppose the basilisk being a magical creature can probably tell more things than an ordinary snake. Perhaps a Muggle-born, from a pure blood wizard?????????? Griffin782002 who is still stuck in a big blue box....... 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 To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Apr 12 20:56:37 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 20:56:37 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127469 >bboyminn: >These books are absolutely biased, there are distorted to a male >perspective, and are male-centeric [period, full stop, absolute end of >sentence]. Yet, how could they be other than /male-centered/ when the >central point-of-view character is a male; further, a very young male? >Instead of complaining that the books are male-centered, which of >course they well should be, people should be marveling, as I do, that >a female author could so thoroughly and accurately capture the >male-mind. Speaking as a former boy (current man), JKR got it >amazingly and wonderfully right. >I speculate some of the things about the portrayal of girls that >people don't like, are simply respresentations of the things that >catch Harry's eye. Logically, the aspects of girls that catch Harry's >eye are not the ways that they are the same as boys, but the way in >which they are very obviously and, from a boy perspective, strangely >different than boys. >I don't see what the problem is, it all make perfect sense to me. >Steve/bboyminn Sherry now I absolutely agree. In fact, when I hear all the complaints of girls not being presented well in the books, I wonder if those same critics would complain that there are not enough strong male characters in something like Little Women or Anne of Green Gables. It has always seemed logical that Harry is the main character and we see the females through his eyes. Sherry From jmrazo at hotmail.com Tue Apr 12 21:03:22 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:03:22 -0000 Subject: Hermione as Stategist (was: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127470 Phoenixgod2000: I would argue that, at *best* Hermione is a competent but not great or even good strategist. And she won't ever be great because she lacks a fundamental understanding of humanity. See more below. > Betsy: > When Hermione sets herself to a task, she usually gets it done, and in > a rather efficient fashion. There's the Polyjuice scheme in CoS, > where she figures out the goal, the components, and the method while > Ron and Harry are still throwing out random theories. Polyjuice was a good plan. It was also a relatively simple one that played to her strengths at academia. And she still screwed it up for herself. She does a > similar thing at the end of PoA with the time turner. IIRC, Hermione > figures out most of Dumbledore's hints, and generally directs her and > Harry's path. (Could be some movie contamination sneaking in there.) She was able to figure out DD meaning before Harry because, until that point, IIRC, Harry didn't know she had a time turner or that such a device even existed. And their success in the past was at least as much due to Harry as it was Hermione. More so, since he was the one to actually act and cast the patronus while she was still trying to figure out if it was a good idea to do that with the timeline. > And of course there's the Rita Skeeter fun in GoF. I'll give her this one. With the caveat that Skeeter is a canny reporter and it could bite her in the behind later. Which Hermione doesn't seem all that worried about. > OotP is where Hermione's particular skills shine. I would disagree. I would even go so far as to say that she was *worse* in OOTP than in the other books. Her best idea was the use of the Quibbler which was an unqualified sucess. She comes up with > the DA (a perfect way to take on Umbridge), and figures out how to > keep the group neatly under the radar. The DA was a great plan, and much of the execution went off well, except that her SNEAK paper was a pretty stupid idea. It was a charm that was completely retroactive. It only worked *after* someone had already squealed. it didn't actually prevent anyone from talking. Not very smart at all. She comes up with a plan, > totally on the fly, to get Harry out of Umbridge's clutches, Her treatment of Umbridge was coldly ruthless - but efficiency and > ruthlessness often go hand in hand (at least in the books I read > *eg*), and Hermione was working under a pretty intense time crunch. A sign that she can lie with a straight face quickly. A good skill to have, but very different from strategy. Actually this is one of her worst plans. The only reason she and Harry survive it is because of Grawp, an X-factor she could not possibly have planned for or counted on. furthurmore, when I read the scene it seemed to me that she was absolutely shocked when the Centaurs (a violent race of human haters) wanted to actually *hurt* Umbridge. She didn't read as ruthless to me at all. A good strategist doesn't plan a situation that they can only escape through dumb luck and without some understanding of how the others in the situation are going to react. Hermione did neither of those two things. she didn't understand centaurs, and used them anyway, and was caught totally off guard when they took offense. > Even more impressively, Hermione recognizes the signs of Voldemort's > plan. I think, because she's got a similar strategic way of thinking > she can tell that something's not quite right about Harry's dream. > She knows what *she'd* do if she was Voldemort, and so she gets > suspicious. This shows that Hermione is smart, and she was able to put together what the scar connection meant. Thats not strategy, its at best pre- strategy. A real strategy would have been figuring out how to use the connection for their own ends. > What Hermione is *not* very good at is getting people to listen to > her. It's not a matter of her not getting people to listen to her, its a matter of understanding people. And she doesn't. That is why she won't ever be a great strategist. She has all of the elements a good one needs, but she lacks the key ingredient--the human factor. She doesn't really understand motivations. She doesn't get that people aren't going to always do the logical thing, that in fact people almost never do the logical thing. She can't read people or anticipate what they would do because she doesn't understand anything on more than a dry, academic level so thats what she bases all her plans around. Her talk with Harry about Cho is a good example of this. when she was talking, it felt like she was reciting a psychological text on grief and what cho was feeling. It so happens that she was right in her case, but she doesn't really understand what cho was going through on an emotional level, she understands it on an academic, stages of grief, level. That explains why, for all her empathy, she never gets along with Luna. She doesn't fit any sort of lable or convention, and thats the only way Hermione knows how to relate to people. > SPEW is another perfect example. Hermione's plan is a good one. Actually her plan is a terrible one. She doesn't even have an overall plan. she has a goal, which is something very different. what plans she has involving SPEW are at best, haphazard. Hermione is a decent strategist when it comes to short plans like the polyjuice potion or 'the get sirius plan' becuse they are relatively uncomplictated and not cluttered by messy human components. It becomes a problem solving process and shes smart so shes good at those. To use a chess analogy, she can see three moves ahead, which is good for a short term goal, but if you want to win you have to see fifteen or twenty moves head. That goes beyond three step planning and enters the realm of contingencies and psychology. To use someone you brought up yesterday, Ender Wiggins is an example of a great strategist. He beat his enemies because he understood them. He knew what they would sacrifice and how they would react to attacks. He knew what they would defend and how long they would do it for. and he knew what they would attack and what they would see as a threat. He knew the same things about his own people. He won his battles because he knew how to balance the conventional and the unconventional to keep his enemies off balance. Hermione doesn't even know how to begin doing that. > Betsy From jmrazo at hotmail.com Tue Apr 12 21:14:22 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:14:22 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127471 > > bboyminn: > > These books are absolutely biased, there are distorted to a male > perspective, and are male-centeric [period, full stop, absolute end of > sentence]. Yet, how could they be other than /male-centered/ when the > central point-of-view character is a male; further, a very young male? This I agree with. > Instead of complaining that the books are male-centered, which of > course they well should be, people should be marveling, as I do, that > a female author could so thoroughly and accurately capture the > male-mind. Speaking as a former boy (current man), JKR got it > amazingly and wonderfully right. I would make the opposite arguement. To me it seems obvious that a woman is writing this story. the whole thing smacks of stereotypes of boyhood and boyish tendencies without any real understanding. I think in a lot of ways the books are demeaning in their portrayal of teen boys. Ron in particular seems a victim of this to me. I refuse to believe that a boy with *five* older brothers could be so clueless about the fairer sex while a bookish only child with few friends possesses keen insight into the same pairings. It totally buys into the sterotype that teen boys are immature and silly while girls are somehow born with maturity and social wisdom. I work with kids their age every day and I can tell you it just ain't true. phoenixgod2000 From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 21:16:10 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:16:10 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD (long response) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127472 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Ooooh, the fun continues! :-) > > I also am enjoying this discussion. I read the posts you mentioned (Jim and Mara). I really enjoy the different perspective we have on the character that, IMO, is the most complex character in the HP series thus far. Our differing perspectives are like viewing a Kleenex box sitting on the floor. Some see one side, others two or three. The cool thing is no one person can see all 6 sides at the same time. Putting the perspectives together gives a better, and often more accurate, overall view. SSSusan: > I wrote to Julie offlist with my attempt at this yesterday, so I > think it's only fair I play along. > > > > > 3. Believes he is "special"...--> This may be what underlies his > > suport for Slytherin and contempt of the other houses. However, > > the other heads of houses may favor their houses as well, just not > > as obviously as Severus. > > SSSusan: > I'm sticking back in the rest of the description of this > characteristic: "Believes he is special and unique and can only be > understood by, or should associate with, other special or high- status > people (or institutions)" > > I do so because I think the rest of it is easier to support. His > comments about "dunderheads" and about what he can show the few who > understand the subtle science and exact art... could speak to this. > With what we've seen, we can only compare Snape to McGonagall in > terms of favoritism, and Snape's got it in spades over MM (whose > broom to Harry was her one big moment of favoritism). I definitely can see you pov. > > > > 4. Requires excessive admiration --> Not sure about this. I don't > > see him acting "chummy" with Draco, just not as contemptable toward > > him as Harry. Not sure what impact excessive admiration would have > > on Severus. He does seem to be loyal to DD, but I would think this > > is because he feels loyalty toward DD and not because DD > > excessively admires him. > > SSSusan: I guess I see requiring admiration as different from > wanting chumminess from students. I have seen it more along the > lines of his being annoyed by "dunderheads" who don't show adequate > appreciation of him or of what he is able to teach them. I see it > also as his being loyal to DD in part because DD has been > *appreciative* of Snape, as someone who has acknowledged his > importance, which I believe he craved. What I meant by "chummy" is responding favorably to someone who showed him admiration. I really like your and Mara's views of his relationship with DD. > > > > 5. Has a sense of entitlement --> He expects to be treated with > > respect by the students because he is a professor. I don't see > > this as entitlement. I would think Minerva would not act to kindly > > if students treated her with disrespect. The difference is she is > > seen as a warmer and more likeable person, even though just as > > strict as Severus. > > SSSusan: > I absolutely do see this. Snape DEMANDS to be referred to by his > title. McGonagall might correct a student who didn't use the title, > but would she do it with as much venom? Would she see it as a > personal affront or as merely an oversight? I think Snape is very > hung up on respect. Yes, I agree. I still wonder if it is a sense of entitlement. "I, Severus Snape, master of this school, > demand..." with the map ? now, maybe that was just how he thought he > could make the map show its secrets; but maybe it was his expectation > that he deserved its doing so (how *dare* it not show it to HIM!). I can see that. > Same thing with the "You do remember how he once tried to kill ME" > line to DD. Not to mention DD's "Some wounds run too deep..." > explanation to Harry about Occlumency. Clearly DD thought a typical > grown man would've been over the bad history w/ James; clearly Snape > is not *and* still feels he's *due* some measure of vengeance or > justice or angry outlet over this. Could be interpreted as a "narcissistic wound." I see it more as a vulnerability. (Hard for me to put this into words.) > > > > 6. In interpersonally exploitative --> I have not read anything in > > canon that would support this. > > SSSusan: Me either. It would be total speculation. OTOH, I think > it *might* be possible to argue that anyone willing to be a Death > Eater might have this attribute? > > > > 7. Lack empathy --> In the HP series, we see Severus from Harry's > > point of view and Harry does not like him. We do not know that he > > lacks empathy. > > SSSusan: I *so* see this as one of Snape's biggies! The "I see no > difference" to Hermione's growing teeth. The entire scene where > Snape states to Lupin, in front of the class, that Lupin will want to > watch out, as Neville Longbottom is in the class ? a total > humiliation of Neville in a situation where it wasn't even his class > and Neville hadn't provoked him. Also, if he were an empathetic > person, might he not understand a little about the kind of life Harry > has had to live, the suffering he has endured? We see absolutely > *no* sign that Snape has been moved one whit by Harry's losses. I > think lack of empathy is one of the most easily demonstrated aspects > of Snape's character. Yes, I can see this. However, I have read speculations (back when I was reading the list about a year ago) that Snape acted this way to "toughen up" those he knew to be in great danger (a Muggle and the son of the Longbottoms). Again, with no insight into his motivation, this is still left for interpretation. > > > > 8. Often envious of others --> Did seem envious of the Marauders in > > the pensive. > > SSSusan: Yes. And, even though it's "biased" testimony, we do have > that bit about Snape's having been jealous of James' Quidditch > skills. One might wonder, too, about whether he was envious of Lupin > as Prefect, James as Head Boy, Sirius & James' intelligence, > James' "strutting about" like a BMOC. Extrapolation, some of that, > but fairly believable, I'd argue. > > > > 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes --> I'd agree > > with this. > > SSSusan: Absolutely. I don't think even Snape apologists would > disagree. > > > > > Julie: > > I would not be surprised if his empathy is what made him turn from > > being a DE and this is what DD knows/sees in Severus. Again, this > > is purely speculation, but based on how I have read the books, this > > has been my interpretation > > > SSSusan: > And it's interesting that yesterday I posted on what would be key for > me in all of this: the reason Snape left Voldy & the Des. If it was > empathy, then I'm with you, Julie. If it was an internal epiphany > brought on by a bout of introspection, I'm definitely off the NPD! > Snape bandwagon. If, however, it was because Voldy did something > which Snape viewed as such an egregious personal affront that he > decided to seek vengeance no matter the cost, then I'm sticking to my > Narcissistic!Snape. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan, who hopes at least a few others are finding > this as fun as she is. Yes, I think the main piece that is missing is the reason he left LV. I do think this would be a determining factor in "making the diagnosis" so to speak because it would give us significantly more insight into his motivations. I did not comment on Lockhart before, but I would agree with Mara. I guess of all the characters, Lucious stood out to me as the most like candidate for NPD, or Antisocial PD. Lockhart to me was such an obvious phony, I ready him strictly for entertainment. The sinister nature of Lucious and the interpersonal exploitation is what jumped out and grabbed me. Lockhart is just more palatable to me. Bottom line, of the three, I would much prefer Severus as a client because of his complexity. Julie Thank you, Susan, for your offlist encouragement to post onlist. From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Apr 12 21:56:27 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:56:27 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD (long response) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127473 Julie wrote: > > > 8. Often envious of others --> Did seem envious of the Marauders in the pensive. > > > > SSSusan: Yes. And, even though it's "biased" testimony, we do > have > > that bit about Snape's having been jealous of James' Quidditch > > skills. One might wonder, too, about whether he was envious of > Lupin > > as Prefect, James as Head Boy, Sirius & James' intelligence, > > James' "strutting about" like a BMOC. Extrapolation, some of > that, > > but fairly believable, I'd argue. > > > > Potioncat: But, wouldn't envy of good-looking, Quidditch hero James Potter be fairly normal and widespread at Hogwarts? Having asked that, I do agree, young Severus and even adult Severus seems to have crossed the "normal" line. > > > 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes --> I'd agree > > > with this. > > > > SSSusan: Absolutely. I don't think even Snape apologists would > > disagree. Potioncat: Why would we? It's one of his more endearing qualities. This has been, and will continue to be, a very interesting thread. I don't usually like "psychological Identifyers" for fictional characters, but this one has taken a different sort of spin and has offered insight into several characters. Whether or not it's what JKR had in mind, doesn't matter so much in this case. She may have been writing from her powers of observation based on people she's had the misfortune to know, or she may have added book research to fill out her characters. These observations are still valid. Thanks to SSSusan for starting this thread! Potioncat From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 22:12:02 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 22:12:02 -0000 Subject: Hermione as Stategist (was: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127474 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > The DA was a great plan, and much of the execution went off well, > except that her SNEAK paper was a pretty stupid idea. It was a charm > that was completely retroactive. GEO: However if the purpose of the charm was to isolate and punishthe traitor or the snitch among the DA then it did accomplish its actual purpose. It only worked *after* someone had > already squealed. it didn't actually prevent anyone from talking. > Not very smart at all. GEO: And would such a spell that would prevent them from talking actually even exist? Considering the traitors on both sides during the previous war, it seems evident that there probably isn't such a spell. when I read the scene it seemed to me that > she was absolutely shocked when the Centaurs (a violent race of > human haters) wanted to actually *hurt* Umbridge. She didn't read > as ruthless to me at all. GEO: Actually she does know that the centaurs were going to hurt Umbridge considering that she was in the forest when the centaurs issued their warnings towards Hagrid and humans in the forest. > A good strategist doesn't plan a situation that they can only escape > through dumb luck and without some understanding of how the others > in the situation are going to react. GEO: Yes, but she didn't think the centaurs were going to harm them considering that they regarded the two of them as foals. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 01:27:03 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:27:03 -0000 Subject: LV and DD - Only One He Ever Feared Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127475 I am sure that this topic like all topics has been explored and probably analyzed to death in the past, but before my time. So here is a question: Why does LV fear DD?? I am inclined to think that it is more than just that DD is a more powerful wizard. But even if that is the only reason, what makes DD more powerful? Is it Love that LV fears or something else? LV seems to know about the ancient magic that many others don't seem to know about. LV discounts it, and we think it is Love. But is there anything else?? I am still trying to sort out the Mystery of DD. When I say that he is immortal I am thinking more along the line of DD being God like. Then folks here remind me that DD is a man and will die. Then we all remember that he said that he would always be available to anyone at Hogwarts that needed him or something like that. So I just keep thinking there is more to DD than just a very wise and powerful wizard. There is *something* about DD. Even a more mysterious *something* than we see in Harry. But what is that *something*? I am sure that he is more than just an old wizard, skillful and wise, etc. There is something more about him. Maybe he is the half-blood prince. Maybe he is the Christ (with that patronus and all.). And maybe not. But there is *Something* that sets him apart from every other wizard that has ever lived or he wouldn't be the person that he is in this story. It is driving me crazy what is that *something special* about DD??? Tonks_op Who would follow DD to the ends of the earth, love him, die for him if need be. But I am not really sure what it is about him. I trust him more than I would ever trust anyone. I don't want to see him die. I fear that I am going to be really depressed in months to come. From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 13 01:27:46 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:27:46 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <330323be55b7db85752c34cf0f28803e@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 127476 Steve (bboyminn): > These books are absolutely biased, there are distorted to a male > perspective, and are male-centeric [period, full stop, absolute end of > sentence]. Yet, how could they be other than /male-centered/ when the > central point-of-view character is a male; further, a very young male? > Instead of complaining that the books are male-centered, which of > course they well should be, people should be marveling, as I do, that > a female author could so thoroughly and accurately capture the > male-mind. Speaking as a former boy (current man), JKR got it > amazingly and wonderfully right. > I speculate some of the things about the portrayal of girls that > people don't like, are simply respresentations of the things that > catch Harry's eye. Logically, the aspects of girls that catch Harry's > eye are not the ways that they are the same as boys, but the way in > which they are very obviously and, from a boy perspective, strangely > different than boys. > I don't see what the problem is, it all make perfect sense to me. The problem is that these "ways in which [girls] are very obviously ... different than boys" are fallacies and silly stereotypes. I submit that the very reason *why* JKR writes Harry-the-boy so well is because she is really just writing a kid. Of course, Harry is an individual, as are we all, so some of his experiences/reactions/emotions will seem more familiar to some of us than to others, but I don't really see any of his traits as specifically gendered. The issue of gender stereotyping arises in the *other* characters in the series. When we move away from Harry himself, we find that in JKR's world, there are a certain set of traits that belong to girls (i.e. giggling, relationship know-how) and a certain set of traits that belong to boys (re: phoenixgod in his post on this subject). While this typification is by no means offensive enough to ruin the series for me (obviously), I do think it's worth examining and questioning. Laura (who hasn't posted in *ages*.) From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 13 01:38:07 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:38:07 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127477 Steve (bboyminn): >> Instead of complaining that the books are male-centered, which of >> course they well should be, people should be marveling, as I do, that >> a female author could so thoroughly and accurately capture the >> male-mind. Speaking as a former boy (current man), JKR got it >> amazingly and wonderfully right. phoenixgod: > I would make the opposite arguement. To me it seems obvious that a > woman is writing this story. the whole thing smacks of stereotypes of > boyhood and boyish tendencies without any real understanding. I think > in a lot of ways the books are demeaning in their portrayal of teen > boys. Ron in particular seems a victim of this to me. I refuse to > believe that a boy with *five* older brothers could be so clueless > about the fairer sex while a bookish only child with few friends > possesses keen insight into the same pairings. It totally buys into > the sterotype that teen boys are immature and silly while girls are > somehow born with maturity and social wisdom. I work with kids their > age every day and I can tell you it just ain't true. I totally agree that some of the stereotypes of boyhood in the Potterverse are demeaning to actual boys, but I think you also need to consider the fact that JKR often uses negative stereotypes of teen girls as well (giggling, shrieking, being 'helpers' etc.). Same token, obverse side: some of the boy-stereotyping is positive (physical bravery, being 'leaders'), as is some of the girl-stereotyping (more mature). Personally, I don't think any of it is any good (stereotyping so rarely is), but I'm willing to forgive all of it, as I love JKR. ^_~ Laura From kempermentor at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 01:52:53 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:52:53 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127478 > > bboyminn: > > Instead of complaining that the books are male-centered, which of > > course they well should be, people should be marveling, as I do, that > > a female author could so thoroughly and accurately capture the > > male-mind. Speaking as a former boy (current man), JKR got it > > amazingly and wonderfully right. >phoenixgod2000: > I would make the opposite arguement. To me it seems obvious that a > woman is writing this story. the whole thing smacks of stereotypes of > boyhood and boyish tendencies without any real understanding. I think > in a lot of ways the books are demeaning in their portrayal of teen > boys. Ron in particular seems a victim of this to me. I refuse to > believe that a boy with *five* older brothers could be so clueless > about the fairer sex while a bookish only child with few friends > possesses keen insight into the same pairings. It totally buys into > the sterotype that teen boys are immature and silly while girls are > somehow born with maturity and social wisdom. I work with kids their > age every day and I can tell you it just ain't true. kemper now: Even though Ron has *five* older brothers he's not really spending time with them. The two oldest are already out of school by his fifth year. In school, Ron has had at most three older brothers. The oldest at school, Percy, seemed to get into a quiet relationship with Penelope. Ron also doesn't like this older brother too much, and so it is understandable that Ron and Percy might not have `guy talk'. The other two brothers, the twins, seem less interested in girls (let the slasher fanfic writers have their fun) and more interested in their life mission, to entertain people, so Ron doesn't see them spitting game at the ladies. It is only in Ron's fourth year that he sees one of them ask one of the chaser girls (Angelina?) to the Winter Ball. The reader is left to understand that they are NOT girlfriend/boyfriend. Are they later? Who knows? Also, during the school year, Ron does not share a room with his brothers. He doesn't seem to share a room with any other brother when not at school. The bookish girl with few friends is a keen observer of people which makes her a believable character who has keen insight to relationships. JKR doesn't just right boys as immature and silly, there're some girls in the books as well. It's just that boy immature and silly looks different than girl immature and silly. From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 02:14:08 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 02:14:08 +0000 Subject: Dumbledore Fans Unite! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127479 Tonks_op showed her impeccable taste by remarking: >Who would follow DD to the ends of the earth, love him, die for him >if need be. But I am not really sure what it is about him. I trust >him more than I would ever trust anyone. I don't want to see him >die. I fear that I am going to be really depressed in months to come. I feel exactly the same way, but I think I know why it is: it is because he is so much like Gandalf, who I also love and admire. I enjoy Dumbledore's dialogue, idiosyncrasies, and the fact that he has such a "nice old professor" exterior but you *do not* want to make him mad (as Crouch Jr. and the MoM -- and Grindelwald, I'll bet -- have learned to their sorrow). The scene where he, in about thirty seconds, knocks out four (five? books at home) MoM agents and has time and energy to calmly discuss plans with McGonagall before anyone regains consciousness is one of my absolute favorite scenes not only in OotP but in the entire series. Janet Anderson From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Apr 13 02:23:14 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 02:23:14 -0000 Subject: Hermione as Stategist (was: Harry as Leader (was: What has Harry learned?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127480 Betsy: > > She does a similar thing at the end of PoA with the time > > turner. IIRC, Hermione figures out most of Dumbledore's hints, > > and generally directs her and Harry's path. (Could be some movie > > contamination sneaking in there.) Phoenixgod: > She was able to figure out DD meaning before Harry because, until > that point, IIRC, Harry didn't know she had a time turner or that > such a device even existed. And their success in the past was at > least as much due to Harry as it was Hermione. More so, since he > was the one to actually act and cast the patronus while she was > still trying to figure out if it was a good idea to do that with > the timeline. SSSusan: In addition to Phoenixgod's point, it was *definitely* Harry who led them through the time-turner events, in terms of decision making and strategy. TMWSNBN *so* altered that as to turn her into Super! Hermione. In fact, it was *Harry* who realized they were supposed to save Buckbeak, as well as Sirius, and it was *Harry* who realized how they could do so. In fact, Hermione rather blanched at the idea of flying Buckbeak up to get Sirius, but Harry insisted they try. Harry is also the one who realized they needed to move from their present position back to Hagrid's hut or werewolf!Lupin would come right at them. "I just saved all our lives," is *Harry's* line, and understandably so. This is not to say Hermione wasn't important to the TT events, as she was. She, especially, helped Harry understand the importance of *not* doing some things he wanted to do [going after Scabbers early, in Hagrid's hut, for instance], but I don't think this is one situation I'd use to show Hermione's strategic skills. Siriusly Snapey Susan From magalud at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 17:32:40 2005 From: magalud at yahoo.com (ludmila souza) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 10:32:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Worst Memory for Whom? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050412173241.3487.qmail@web52107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127481 Chrusotoxos wrote: > > I mean, the memory of Snape's 5th year was his own worst > memory or the worst Harry could see (because it would > undermine his love for his father James)? > > Is Snape so devious? Did he really leave that memory behind > for Harry to see? I believe that's the worst memory in Harry's POV. Because, up until then, his father was a hero, a perfect guy: excellent student, excellent Quidditch player, loving father and husband... James was practically a saint. Then, Harry finds out through someone else's memory that there are holes in his shining armour. He gets sick to his stomach, having been bullied himself. He even wonders about how his parents got together later on... That was a turning point for Harry and his relationship with his dead father. It was so powerful that he risks a lot by contacting Sirius in order to find out more about what he had seen. His image of his heroic father was forever shattered, but I don't believe it was irreparably damaged. Furthermore, Snape is a former Death Eater. He has got to have seen worse things done by Lord Voldemort and his minions than being bullied by James and the Gang. It wouldn't surprise me if Snape himself had done some of those horrible deeds. So, it can't have been Snape's worse memories, IMHO. I am not so sure that Snape left the Pensieve on purpose for Harry to find out. He was way too distraught when he caught Harry looking into it. If he was intent on him finding it out, he'd been cooler about it. Ludmila From katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 12 16:50:42 2005 From: katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk (Katrina) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 16:50:42 -0000 Subject: Worst Memory for Whom? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127482 Chrusotoxos wrote: > I mean, the memory of Snape's 5th year was his own > worst memory or the worst Harry could see (because it would > undermine his love for his father James)? > > Is Snape so devious? Did he really leave that memory behind > for Harry to see? Hi everyone, this is my first post, I'm 19 and a history student from London, UK. Chrusotoxos, are you sure this is from the editorial? I looked and couldn't see it mentioned, however it is mentioned in the forums under Occlumency and Legilimency. Anyway, I think that the memory is one that Snape didn't want Harry or anyone else to see, due to his reaction afterwards: "It was scary: Snape's lips were shaking, his face was white, his teeth were bared" (OoP pp 572, English Hardback). I can't see why Snape would react so strongly if he had 'left the memory behind' for Harry to see. I'm not sure if you can leave memories, etc... behind for people to see because for them to see them they have to be a Legilimens and you be in a weakened state. Do you see what I mean? Regarding it being the worst vision Harry could have seen, I would have thought that as Snape was a Death Eater there were much worse things he could have shown that he must have known about if not played an active role in. For example the torture of Neville's parents/the death of Harry's parents. "Katrina" From periwinklebluebear at yahoo.com Tue Apr 12 16:47:47 2005 From: periwinklebluebear at yahoo.com (nicole angeles) Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 09:47:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Will Trelawney die? / hello In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050412164747.16192.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127483 Hi, I'm a new member here and I know that it says that it's for adults and I'm just a teenager but I really want to know how you dissect the facts of the book and I want to share my comments about it.. I have no one to talk to about such things here... hope it's alright with ya'll. mfterman wrote: > My own feeling is that Trelawney has one more prophecy in her > about the showdown between Harry and Voldemort, which she will > give in book six, afterwards she's pretty much a dead woman > walking. She might even be killed in the middle of her prediction > in case Voldemort is hearing something that he doesn't like. > She's a fairly minor character and her death won't disrupt things > too much. Hey, technically Trelawney is important...if it wasn't for her, book five wouldn't have a meaning. Harry wouldn't have a forethought on what will happen in year three.. Trelawney's importance in the book is not really obvious so some may expect her to be a useless entry in the novel... "periwinklebluebear" From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 03:47:53 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 03:47:53 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127484 Dysisgirl wrote: > > > As I was studying the excerpt in Book 5 where Harry breaks into > Snape's thoughts, I noticed something odd. "A greasy haired > teenager sat alone in a dark bedroom, pointing his wand at the > ceiling, shooting down flies..." [US Verion, Book 5, pg. 592] > > Of course, we don't know if teenage Snape is using the Killing curse (or if it's even Snape, for that matter...). But we haven't been introduced to many other spells that can create those same effects. > Assuming that it is Snape, and that he is using the Killing Curse as a teenager, we have to wonder (1) where he learned it, (2) how powerful he must have been, and (3) why was a teenage kid using an Unforgivable Curse when he knew full well that the Ministry had and Underage Wizarding Policy. > > For the first two, I think we can reasonably conclude that Snape was and still is good at the Dark Arts. After all, he was completely > immersed in his DADA OWL as we see in "Snape's Worst Memory." And > also, hasn't he been applying for the DADA teacher position ever > since we've known him? Where he learned it, well that's still a > mystery, unless someone out there has a good theory. But it wouldn't have been too hard. We've seen repeatedly in the books that Snape's a powerful wizard. However, I'm most interested in how the Ministry didn't send him a letter for Underage Wizardry. > > The Ministry uses special magic to detect when an underage wizard > has done magic. Yet, we see a teenager doing magic in his own > bedroom without any qualms. Does he know some sort of spell that > shields him from the special magic that the Ministry uses to detect > underage magic? Carol responds: I think several things are going on here. First, while young Severus did know an astounding number of hexes and jinxes before he entered Hogwarts, I doubt very much that he knew any Unforgiveable Curses while he was still in school. Most likely he was simply stunning the flies out of boredom. Why weren't the stunning spells detected? The same reason that he was able to practice jinxes and curses at home without being detected (before he was even legally of age to buy a wand)--his parents were both magical and it would have been impossible for the MoM to know who performed those spells. (What I want to know is whose wand little Sevvie used to learn those hexes! Or maybe he got his wand in January when he turned eleven and learned them all before he went to school September 1!) Anyway, clearly the MoM watches some households more closely than others. There were, we can be pretty sure, no Muggles in the Snape family household or anywhere nearby to witness the magic, and who knows? Maybe witch housewives routinely stun flies rather than swatting them. I don't think it's at all comparable to Crouch!Moody (an adult DE who performs all three Unforgiveables *on people* in Gof) killing Crucioing, and Imperioing spiders. (Now if young Snape had made the flies tapdance, I'd be worried! Yes, I know, the idea I just stole is from the Cos film!) So--no need for shield charms to hide his magic and no need to assume that he used a killing curse on the flies. BTW, I do think that Snape is a powerful and talented wizard, but doing well on a *Defense against* the Dark Arts course is not necessarily evidence of ability in the Dark Arts themselves (aside from whatever curses he learned as a child, probably from witnessing his father perform them). If Snape used the Unforgiveable Curses as a DE, and we have no indication as yet whether he did or didn't, I think he learned them as a DE from his older friends (Malfoy and the Lestranges, maybe) or from Voldemort himself. I doubt very much that bored teenager!Snape was performing Unforgiveable Curses on flies. If he'd known how to use a killing curse at fifteen or sixteen, James Potter probably would not have survived to father Harry. Carol From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 07:10:03 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 07:10:03 -0000 Subject: Is Tonks Irish? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127485 wrote: > > Her favourite expression, "Wotcher" sounds moreLondon than Irish to me. > Sylvia WHAT does 'Wotcher' mean anyway? I never understood that word! Chys From sunflowerlaw at gmail.com Wed Apr 13 08:26:36 2005 From: sunflowerlaw at gmail.com (Lindsay) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 01:26:36 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Is Tonks Irish? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127486 >Chys: > WHAT does 'Wotcher' mean anyway? I never understood that word! Lindsay: It's an informal English greeting (Cockney), that is the slang form of "what cheer." I suppose, as in, what a cheer it is to see you. Can also mean how are you. It is a term mainly used in London. From naama_gat at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 08:52:12 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 08:52:12 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD (long response) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127487 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > > 4. Requires excessive admiration --> Not sure about this. I don't see him acting "chummy" with Draco, just not as contemptable toward him as Harry. Not sure what impact excessive admiration would have on Severus. He does seem to be loyal to DD, but I would think this is because he feels loyalty toward DD and not because DD excessively admires him. > > SSSusan: I guess I see requiring admiration as different from > wanting chumminess from students. I have seen it more along the > lines of his being annoyed by "dunderheads" who don't show adequate > appreciation of him or of what he is able to teach them. I see it > also as his being loyal to DD in part because DD has been > *appreciative* of Snape, as someone who has acknowledged his > importance, which I believe he craved. > > 5. Has a sense of entitlement --> He expects to be treated with > > respect by the students because he is a professor. I don't see > > this as entitlement. I would think Minerva would not act to kindly if students treated her with disrespect. The difference is she is seen as a warmer and more likeable person, even though just as strict as Severus. > > SSSusan: > I absolutely do see this. Snape DEMANDS to be referred to by his > title. McGonagall might correct a student who didn't use the title, > but would she do it with as much venom? Would she see it as a > personal affront or as merely an oversight? I think Snape is very > hung up on respect. Yes, Snape is very hung up on respect - but is not hung up at all on admiration, IMO. Not having the books here, I can't check the text, but I do remember Snape overhearing Harry and Ron bad-mouthing him, and he doesn't care - he seems amused, if anything. I also agree that while pleased with Draco's flattery, he doesn't seek it. His economy of self doesn't seem to depend on admiration (this is a definition of "admiration" from dictionary.com: "a feeling of delighted approval and liking"; how unlike Snape does that sound?). Admiration is about qualities; respect is about position and status. As adults, we don't need admiration (although we enjoy it when we get it) - but we all demand, to some degree, respect. As a need, admiration belongs to childhood, respect to adulthood. If you look at the Snape-goes-ballistic incidents, they are much better understood as hurt pride/dignity (i.e., being disrespected) than hurt ego (not receiving admiration). I think this is a major point against the narcissistic Snape theory. The narcissistic self got "stuck", so to speak, in the admiration stage. Snape is healthier than that - his need for respect is exaggerated and obviously a result of insecurities, but still much closer to normal adult needs than a narcissist. > > > 6. In interpersonally exploitative --> I have not read anything >in canon that would support this. > > SSSusan: Me either. It would be total speculation. OTOH, I think > it *might* be possible to argue that anyone willing to be a Death > Eater might have this attribute? I don't agree with your last speculation. The narcissist exploitativeness arises from a deep lack of an authentic response to other human beings as specific persons. Think of Lockhart and Voldemort. Lockhart's recognition of other people's existence in themselves and their speficity is extremely shallow; emotionally, for him, people are fans or potential fans. Voldemort is the same - only for him people are abject followers (or not) - he needs to see his reflection as the dark and terrible, most powerful dark wizard in their eyes. Snape, on the other hand, responds to people authentically, emotionally (passionately, rather) and specifically - of course, he's all twisted and bitter and full of rage - but he doesn't have that unique disconnect that (I believe) characterises the narcissist. Naama, on the not-NPD side From miranda_mcgonagall37 at yahoo.ca Wed Apr 13 09:10:24 2005 From: miranda_mcgonagall37 at yahoo.ca (Miranda) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 09:10:24 -0000 Subject: Worst Memory for Whom? In-Reply-To: <20050412173241.3487.qmail@web52107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127488 > Chrusotoxos wrote: > > > > I mean, the memory of Snape's 5th year was his own worst > > memory or the worst Harry could see (because it would > > undermine his love for his father James)? ludmila souza wrote: > I believe that's the worst memory in Harry's POV. Because, up until then, his father was a hero, a perfect guy: excellent student, excellent Quidditch player, loving father and husband... James was practically a saint. Then, Harry finds out through someone else's memory that there are holes in his shining armour. He gets sick to his stomach, having been bullied himself. He even wonders about how his parents got together later on... Although the argument that it is Harry's POV is a strong one, I am beginning to wonder if there is something going on within the memory that we don't yet know. Even though Snape has potentially been through awful experiences as a DE, I wonder if something happened in this moment that changed him. It may seem like a bit of a stretch, but what if, for example, this moment of humiliation was the final straw for Snape and what led him to become a DE? Or maybe this was the last time Lily stood up for Snape? I'm not trying to suggest a Lily/Snape romance or anything, but if she was finally fed up with trying to help him, maybe the bullying took a turn for the worse from then on. Anyone else wonder if it really is Snape's Worst Memory, but we will find out why in book six? Miss Miranda, a long time lurker emerging From miranda_mcgonagall37 at yahoo.ca Wed Apr 13 09:30:22 2005 From: miranda_mcgonagall37 at yahoo.ca (Miranda) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 09:30:22 -0000 Subject: Will Trelawney die? / hello In-Reply-To: <20050412164747.16192.qmail@web53207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127489 > mfterman wrote: > > My own feeling is that Trelawney has one more prophecy in her > > about the showdown between Harry and Voldemort, which she will > > give in book six, afterwards she's pretty much a dead woman > > walking. She might even be killed in the middle of her prediction > > in case Voldemort is hearing something that he doesn't like. > > She's a fairly minor character and her death won't disrupt things > > too much. nicole angeles wrote: > Hey, technically Trelawney is important...if it wasn't for her, book five wouldn't have a meaning. Harry wouldn't have a forethought on > what will happen in year three.. Welcome periwinklebluebear! Miss Miranda here... I agree with periwinklebluebear that Trelawney has definitely proven to be more important than I thought she would be. And I think that because she ended up playing such a vital role, especially in the plot of OotP, she is even more "marked" for death. I also agree with mfterman that she most likely has another prophecy in her, but I doubt very much it will be revealed before her demise. I think that Trelawney's very existence and ability to occasionally prophesize goes against one of the strong themes of JKR's books ? that we chose our own destinies, they are not chosen by us. I think that Trelawney's near dismissal in OotP hints that not only could she be in danger outside Hogwarts, but also that she doesn't fit very well into the world of the school. Her "special gifts" are not only unpredictable but also difficult to interpret. Although she has been a key part of the plot so far, IMHO to have her announce a secret and help Harry save the day doesn't fit with JKR's message thus far. Instead, I think it would make more sense for her to be killed, but the battle to continue, because in the end, she can't truly help Harry understand his future ? it's something he must do on his own. And although I will miss her (she can be amusing sometimes) I will be very surprised if she lives through book 6. Miss Miranda From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 12:32:59 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 12:32:59 -0000 Subject: Basillisk In-Reply-To: <20050412204435.95425.qmail@web52702.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127490 > rowanbrookt wrote: > > I was re-reading HPATCOS last night and wondered how did Salazar > Slytherin plan for the basillisk to only kill muggle born witches and > wizards. Surely the basillisk would just kill anyone who happened to > look at it as it searched for muggle borns. The book does say that > Ginny controlled by Tom riddle was setting the basillisk on muggle > borns specifically, but that doesn't seen satisfactory to me. Any > ideas? Ginger: I think the answer lies in Ginny. She was the one who did the actual speaking. Tom forced her to, of course. Tom had also been gleaning information from her for months. Ginny would have known that Colin was a Muggleborn. She certainly knew Hermione was. If she caught Percy and Penelope together, she probably did a bit of research into "the girl kissing her brother". I know I would have. Justin leaves me wondering. How would she have known about him? Unless she overheard him talking to someone else in the halls. Mrs. Norris is a puzzle too. I don't recall that Ginny had run afoul of Filch at that point. NHN was probably just at the wrong place in the wrong time. Did I miss anyone? Tom could have forced her to sic the basillisk on any Muggle she happened to see when she was alone. Question for further pondering: Why was Ginny up at the time of night when Colin was sneaking up to see Harry? And in that place? Was she, too, sneaking up to see Harry? For her own purposes? Or Tom's? The plot thickens. Ginger, who doesn't remember enough from her psych minor to contribute to the N!Snape thread, but is enjoying it anyway. From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 13:34:45 2005 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:34:45 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127491 > phoenixgod: > > I would make the opposite arguement. To me it seems obvious that a > > woman is writing this story. the whole thing smacks of stereotypes of > > boyhood and boyish tendencies without any real understanding. I think > > in a lot of ways the books are demeaning in their portrayal of teen > > boys. Ron in particular seems a victim of this to me. I refuse to > > believe that a boy with *five* older brothers could be so clueless > > about the fairer sex while a bookish only child with few friends > > possesses keen insight into the same pairings. It totally buys into > > the sterotype that teen boys are immature and silly while girls are > > somehow born with maturity and social wisdom. I work with kids their > > age every day and I can tell you it just ain't true. >laura wrote: > I totally agree that some of the stereotypes of boyhood in the > Potterverse are demeaning to actual boys, but I think you also need to > consider the fact that JKR often uses negative stereotypes of teen > girls as well (giggling, shrieking, being 'helpers' etc.). > > Same token, obverse side: some of the boy-stereotyping is positive > (physical bravery, being 'leaders'), as is some of the > girl-stereotyping (more mature). > > Personally, I don't think any of it is any good (stereotyping so rarely > is), but I'm willing to forgive all of it, as I love JKR. ^_~ > Tammy: So JKR stereotypes - some stereotypes aren't all that bad. For the most part, boys are immature and clueless when it comes to girls. For the most part, young girls giggle, shriek, and end up being mommy's or teacher's little helper. I submit - so what? If you think back to your school days, how many oddballs were there? How many clueless immature boys? How many giggling girls, who usually do travel in packs? Not all of the characters fit the same stereotype either. You've got Ron, the classic youngest boy in a large family. You've got Neville, the shy backward boy. You've got Fred and George, classic school pranksters. You've got Lavender and her pack of giggling schoolgirls. If you're writing a book design for children, you want characters in there that the kids can relate to (same is true for adult books for that matter). People relate to people they know. At my school, I was the Luna. My best friend was more like Hermione. And I definitely knew some Freds and Georges. So they're stereotyped - so what? -Tammy, who wanted to post a "me too" to bboyminn's post and add that it's not all that hard to get into the male mind :P From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 13 13:48:50 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 13:48:50 -0000 Subject: Basillisk In-Reply-To: <62.52c10366.2f8d7f37@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127492 > In a message dated 4/12/2005 12:30:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, > rowanbrookt at h... writes: > > I was re-reading HPATCOS last night and wondered how did Salazar > Slytherin plan for the basillisk to only kill muggle born witches and > wizards. Surely the basillisk would just kill anyone who happened to > look at it as it searched for muggle borns. The book does say that > Ginny controlled by Tom riddle was setting the basillisk on muggle > borns specifically, but that doesn't seen satisfactory to me. Any > ideas? Hannah: Well, this is supposing that he really did intend for it to kill Muggle-borns. There was some interesting speculation recently on this list that Slytherin did not in fact intend that at all, rather that he left the snake to protect the school in the event of an attack. Assuming he did intend it to kill Muggle-borns, I think it was down to the one the controlling it - Slytherin's heir - to identify the Muggle-borns and tell the snake who to attack. If the snake naturally went for people with Muggle blood then Tom himself would have been attacked by it, and he wouldn't have needed to instruct it to go for half-blooded Harry either. Also, it wouldn't explain the attack on Mrs Norris, who is a cat (as far as we know...) Hannah From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 15:08:19 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:08:19 -0000 Subject: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD (long response) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127493 > > Yes, Snape is very hung up on respect - but is not hung up at all on > admiration, IMO. > Not having the books here, I can't check the text, but I do remember > Snape overhearing Harry and Ron bad-mouthing him, and he doesn't > care - he seems amused, if anything. I also agree that while pleased > with Draco's flattery, he doesn't seek it. > His economy of self doesn't seem to depend on admiration (this is a > definition of "admiration" from dictionary.com: "a feeling of > delighted approval and liking"; how unlike Snape does that sound?). > Admiration is about qualities; respect is about position and status. > As adults, we don't need admiration (although we enjoy it when we get > it) - but we all demand, to some degree, respect. As a need, > admiration belongs to childhood, respect to adulthood. > If you look at the Snape-goes-ballistic incidents, they are much > better understood as hurt pride/dignity (i.e., being disrespected) > than hurt ego (not receiving admiration). > > I think this is a major point against the narcissistic Snape theory. > The narcissistic self got "stuck", so to speak, in the admiration > stage. Snape is healthier than that - his need for respect is > exaggerated and obviously a result of insecurities, but still much > closer to normal adult needs than a narcissist. > > I don't agree with your last speculation. The narcissist > exploitativeness arises from a deep lack of an authentic response to > other human beings as specific persons. Think of Lockhart and > Voldemort. Lockhart's recognition of other people's existence in > themselves and their speficity is extremely shallow; emotionally, for > him, people are fans or potential fans. Voldemort is the same - only > for him people are abject followers (or not) - he needs to see his > reflection as the dark and terrible, most powerful dark wizard in > their eyes. > Snape, on the other hand, responds to people authentically, > emotionally (passionately, rather) and specifically - of course, he's > all twisted and bitter and full of rage - but he doesn't have that > unique disconnect that (I believe) characterises the narcissist. > > > Naama, on the not-NPD side Naama, You and I seem to be sharing the same view of Snape. What is your opinion of Lucious Malfoy? My post on this was #127435. I am curious about a couple of things. First, how do you see Lucious and NPD? Second, what canon evidence do you see for Lucious and Antisocial PD? Julie From fschapp at gmx.de Wed Apr 13 09:00:31 2005 From: fschapp at gmx.de (schappi02) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 09:00:31 -0000 Subject: Transfer Godric's Hollow to Privet Drive Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127494 Has anyone an idea, why it tooks one day for Dumbledore and Hagrid to find Harry in his destroyed home and take him to his aunt and uncle. The attack of Voldi took place in the night of Halloween, the arrival of Hagrid with Harry was about midnight the following day. This is a long time for a wizard with a flying bike, isn't it? And Harry was sleeping, not crying of hunger or thirst. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Apr 13 15:51:35 2005 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:51:35 -0000 Subject: Transfer Godric's Hollow to Privet Drive In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127495 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "schappi02" wrote: > > Has anyone an idea, why it tooks one day for Dumbledore and Hagrid to > find Harry in his destroyed home and take him to his aunt and uncle. > The attack of Voldi took place in the night of Halloween, the arrival > of Hagrid with Harry was about midnight the following day. This is a > long time for a wizard with a flying bike, isn't it? And Harry was > sleeping, not crying of hunger or thirst. Jen: You've pointed out one of the huge, unanswered mysteries of the series! There's been much speculation about the missing 24-hours. Unfortunately my HPFGU homepage isn't loading correctly to search the Fantastic posts section at this site, but I did find a huge analysis on the Lexicon: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/essays/timeline_potters.html Most speculation includes Harry being whisked away to a home for safekeeping, presumably to someone who might know a little more about babies than Hagrid. (Although you might make a case that Hagrid could at least feed and diaper a baby after all his time raising interestin' creatures ). My favorite explanation is the Longbottoms. Neville would have been the same age, and Alice would have all the supplies and know-how to care for Harry. Another speculation is Mrs. Figg (refer to Lexicon). Hopefully the long-awaited first chapter of HBP will answer this question, if speculation is correct that Chap. 1 will finally reveal the secret of Godric's Hollow. Jen (If the Lexicon address gets cut off, just go to the Lexicon homepage and search for 'Missing 24 hours') From kempermentor at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 16:58:21 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 16:58:21 -0000 Subject: Lucius and Antisocial PD was Re: Lucious, Severus, and Nar... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127496 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" wrote: > Julie is snipped until she poses the question: What is your opinion of Lucious Malfoy? My post on this was #127435. I am curious about a couple of things. First, how do you see Lucious and NPD? Second, what canon evidence do you see for Lucious and Antisocial PD? Kemper now: I see Lucius as Antisocial. I use to think that perhaps he was poor growing up, but through this thread I think he acts like a Conduct Disorder youth who comes from money. If this is so, he may not have had to experience consequences for his behaviors growing up. I have no canon for this just gut of experience with Conduct Disorders. But... I think I can give some canon for Antisocial PD. Needs three. 1. Failure to conform to social norms with respect lawful behaviors as indicated by repeatedly performing acts that are grounds for arrest. 2. Deceitfulness, as indicated by repeated lying, use of aliases, or conning others for personal profit or pleasure 3. Impulsivity or failure to plan ahead 4. Irritability and aggressiveness, as indicated by repeated physical fights or assaults 5. Reckless disregard for safety of self or others 6. Consistent irresponsibility, as indicated by repeated failure to sustain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations 7. Lack of remorse, as indicated by being indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another Heres what I see 1. In CS giving Dark Magic, the diary, to underage witch (Not sure if that's illegal, but there are raids going on to search for the Dark items). Attempt to attack Harry at the end of CS when he unknowingly freed Doby. In OP, placing Bode under Imperius Curse. Then killing him at St. Mungo's. I think canon can be implied because it is mentioned that Lucius gives highly to the hospital which may allow for some privilege in order to get a snipping of Devil's Snare to Bode's bedside. Almost everything at the Dept. of Mysteries. 2. He presents to those `in public' as a philanthropist, or at least a generous donor. Sufficiently deceitful. Ted Bundy was a lawyer. 3. I'm ruling out 4. Back to CS, willing to assault Harry, a child 5. I'm ruling this out as well I think he has a thoughtful disregard for others 6. I'm ruling out 7. Though he never says that he is not remorseful, the reader is left with feeling that he lacks guilt. After Voldy's fall, he comes back into the fold of Magical society claiming Voldy seduced or tricked him. He seems to fit criteria. I have a new question. Umbridge. She wears a lot of rings. For me, this is almost always a sign of a Borderline or a Histrionic. But she doesn't quite read/feel like one. She does seem to have a psychosis. Maybe bipolar? Kemper From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Apr 13 17:16:38 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:16:38 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127497 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > These books are absolutely biased, there are distorted to a male > > perspective, and are male-centeric [period, full stop, absolute end > of > > sentence]. Yet, how could they be other than /male-centered/ when the > > central point-of-view character is a male; further, a very young > male? > > This I agree with. > > > Instead of complaining that the books are male-centered, which of > > course they well should be, people should be marveling, as I do, that > > a female author could so thoroughly and accurately capture the > > male-mind. Speaking as a former boy (current man), JKR got it > > amazingly and wonderfully right. phoenixgod2000: > I would make the opposite arguement. To me it seems obvious that a > woman is writing this story. the whole thing smacks of stereotypes of > boyhood and boyish tendencies without any real understanding. I think > in a lot of ways the books are demeaning in their portrayal of teen > boys. Ron in particular seems a victim of this to me. I refuse to > believe that a boy with *five* older brothers could be so clueless > about the fairer sex while a bookish only child with few friends > possesses keen insight into the same pairings. It totally buys into > the sterotype that teen boys are immature and silly while girls are > somehow born with maturity and social wisdom. I work with kids their > age every day and I can tell you it just ain't true. Geoff: Having taught teenagers for over 30 years, being still involved with boys' club work at my church and being male, I would disagree. I have been married for nearly 34 years and am /still/ left clueless by my wife's take on events from time to time; the female mind just doesn't touch base with mine. :-) I think that you are stereotyping if you think that every guy in his mid-teens is thinking of nothing but girls and sex. Some of those I see on a regular basis do spend a lot of time texting various ladies or receiving texts but others are into computer games and games consoles, or arguing over their favourite football teams or just fooling around. Others are more serious minded and thinking about schoolwork or more intellectual interests. Nope, the guys I see regularly are certainly present a very wide cross-section of patterns of behaviour. I commented long ago that I am often amazed at the ability Jo Rowling has to present a fairly accurate picture of teenage boys. Another point to take on board is that Harry and his group are, in book terms, currently in the summer of 1996. Even in the real time which has elapsed since then, teenage behaviour has changed and moved on at a mind-boggling rate. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 17:36:30 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:36:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] LV and DD - Only One He Ever Feared In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050413173631.79030.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127498 --- Tonks wrote: > > Why does LV fear DD?? I am inclined to think that it is more than > just that DD is a more powerful wizard. I think a big part of it we can trace back to Tom Riddle's boast that he'd always been able to charm the people he needed. I think Dumbledore was immune to that kind of easy manipulation (and TR would be quite contemptuous of anyone who fell for his charm) and showed it. TR/LV would have to tread warily around him for that reason. Also, thanks to Pettigrew, LV knew about the Order of the Phoenix and knew that it was more effective than the MoM. So there would be another reason to regard Dumbledore as an effective opponent. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/ From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Apr 13 17:41:37 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 17:41:37 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: <330323be55b7db85752c34cf0f28803e@fandm.edu> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127499 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote: > > The issue of gender stereotyping arises in the *other* characters in > the series. When we move away from Harry himself, we find that in > JKR's world, there are a certain set of traits that belong to girls > (i.e. giggling, relationship know-how) and a certain set of traits that > belong to boys (re: phoenixgod in his post on this subject). While > this typification is by no means offensive enough to ruin the series > for me (obviously), I do think it's worth examining and questioning. > > Laura (who hasn't posted in *ages*.) Hickengruendler: I don't really see problem. IMO, all these stereotypes have some truth in them. I literally went to school with Parvati and Lavender. Whenever I'm reading about them two former female classmates come to my mind. They are just like clones of them, all down to the giggling. And even if they were not exactly like that, that's certainly how all the boys in our class saw them, therefore Parvati and Lavender are IMO pretty realistically written. The problem would be, if all the girls were like Parvati and Lavender, but they aren't. Angelina is a stereotype, too, (although more humanized than Parvati and Lavender), but a totally different one. And we shouldn't forget that those are minor characters. JKR can't give them all the same development, and if she uses stereotypes to describe the minor characters, I quite frankly don't see any problem. I haven't read a book in which the author didn't use a stereotype. And out of the main or semi-main characters, those who started as real stereotypes, were the ones who IMO developed the most, for example Neville. From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 13 18:14:47 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 14:14:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127501 I (Laura) wrote: >> I totally agree that some of the stereotypes of boyhood in the >> Potterverse are demeaning to actual boys, but I think you also need to >> consider the fact that JKR often uses negative stereotypes of teen >> girls as well (giggling, shrieking, being 'helpers' etc.). >> >> Same token, obverse side: some of the boy-stereotyping is positive >> (physical bravery, being 'leaders'), as is some of the >> girl-stereotyping (more mature). >> >> Personally, I don't think any of it is any good (stereotyping so >> rarely >> is), but I'm willing to forgive all of it, as I love JKR. ^_~ >> Tammy replied: > So JKR stereotypes - some stereotypes aren't all that bad. For the > most part, boys are immature and clueless when it comes to girls. For > the most part, young girls giggle, shriek, and end up being mommy's or > teacher's little helper. I submit - so what? The so what is that the "received wisdom" you're citing may or may not be factual *and* may or may not be harmful. What about the boys who aren't rambunctious? What about the girls that are? What do you think happens when adults take a "boys will be boys" attitude in their dealings with young males, but expect more obedience and maturity from young females? Don't you think these are sort of self-fulfilling prophecies? Especially when they are supported by "common knowledge" and cultural icons such as Harry Potter? > If you think back to your school days, how many oddballs were there? Er . . . lots? What do you mean by oddballs? People that don't fit the mould? As someone who attended a very "girl-centric" clique-y middle school, I can tell you that even the people who seem the *most* representative of the stereotypes are often actually struggling the hardest between trying to fit in and trying to define their individuality. > How many clueless immature boys? How many giggling girls, who usually > do travel in packs? I would not, in general, typify males as "clueless" -- not matter what age group we're talking about. The fact is, if you expect certain traits from a group of kids, you will general find that those traits become more prevalent in the group than others. All of this, of course, stems from the human drive to classify, to categorize, and to define the "us" and the "them." I'm not saying this drive is EVIL, by any means, but I *do* think it needs to be acknowledged, at the very least. > Not all of the characters fit the same stereotype > either. You've got Ron, the classic youngest boy in a large family. > You've got Neville, the shy backward boy. You've got Fred and George, > classic school pranksters. You've got Lavender and her pack of > giggling schoolgirls. I'm not saying that the characters aren't individuals, and I think you're talking less about general stereotypes here and more about *character* types. What I am arguing is that *overall* in the Potterverse, there are certain traits and roles given to females and *different* traits and roles given to men. And I *don't* think that's a particularly healthy view of the world, is all. People should just be people, right? > If you're writing a book design for children, you want characters in > there that the kids can relate to (same is true for adult books for > that matter). People relate to people they know. At my school, I was > the Luna. My best friend was more like Hermione. And I definitely knew > some Freds and Georges. So they're stereotyped - so what? I agree with the first part of the statement, insofar as it is easier to use stock character types to "catch" a child's imagination, although I would argue that it *is*, in fact, the familiar and comfortable stereotypes they are responding to, not the idea that these stereotypes can be applied directly to their acquaintances. As for your anecdotal example, I again stress the difference between identifying with a character *type* and identifying with the *overall* gender stereotypes present in the books. For instance, would you identify with the idea that females are helpers and males are leaders? What about women being care-takers and men being rescuers? Or girls being emotionally-savvy and boys being, well, not? ^_~ And if you *do* identify with these things, do you think everyone else does or should do so as well? Are these valid and good impressions to enforce for children? On the other hand, if you don't think that HP reinforces the stereotypes I mentioned at *all*, that's another discussion entirely. (I won't even get into the argument of whether HP is specifically a children's series or not.) Laura (who stresses that she is not trying to be contentious here and is *absolutely* in no way trying to say that HP is bad, sexist and/or should be burned. ^_^) From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 18:26:40 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 18:26:40 -0000 Subject: Character Psychological Profiles - Umbridge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127502 Thank you, SSSusan, for starting this thread. I've amended the subject as an overal "Charcter Psychological Profile" and the character can be changed to fit the post. >He seems to fit criteria. I agree wtih your assessment of Lucious as being Antisocial PD. The only real reservation I had was a lack of canon regarding his youth and adolescence. While I think your assumption is accurate, we have to recognize it as an assumption. For that reason only, I would keep Antisocial PD a "Rule Out" and go with Narcissistic PD for now given the canon. > I have a new question. Umbridge. She wears a lot of rings. For me, > this is almost always a sign of a Borderline or a Histrionic. But > she doesn't quite read/feel like one. She does seem to have a > psychosis. Maybe bipolar? > > Kemper Umbridge is difficult for me as well. Having read OOTP when it first came out and not having my book with me, my comments will be brief. However, I would like to continue this thread and comment on what Kemper has proposed. Umbridge is an odd bird. As a professor of mine said, some people are hard to diagnosis because "Mean Old Battle Axe" ain't in the DSM! I do not think she is Bipolar because I do not see the fluctuation of her mood. Even if she were a "mean manic," I see her presentation as too consistent to be Bipolar. Could she be Dysthymic? It is a chronic depressive condition, with hers being expressed as irritable, unhappy, and generally nasty? I don't know. I agree with Kemper. Some parts of her presentation are like Borderline/Hystrionic, but not enough to be diagnosed as such. I know what you mean by "she just doesn't read/feel like one." What would you think of Paranoid Personality traits? I will write the criteria and what my impressions are, but I certainly will defer to someone with more canon knowledge on this one. "A pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others such that their motives are interpreted as malevolent... 1. "Suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are explointing, harming, or deceiving him or her" 2. "Is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends or associates" 3. "Is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear that the information will be used maliciously against him or her" 4. "Reads hidden demeaning or threatening meanings into benign remarks or events" 5. "Persistently bears grudges, ie., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights" 6. "Perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack" 7. "Has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding fidelity of spouse or sexual partner" -- eeeewww!! the visual of Umbridge as a sexual being just turned my stomach!!! Ok, now my thoughts in general. What makes this possibility intriguing is that we would have to look at the Umbridge of the first half of the book, when she first arrives at Hogwarts. What happens with many people with PPD is the old self-fulfilling prophecy. THey expect people to treat them this way, so they react what they think of as in defense. Their treatment of people then causes people to make demeaning remarks, attach reputation, etc. So, if we look at Toady-Woman at the end of the book, then we might think, "Well, of course she thought that because that's the way she was treated." The question is this: Was her treatment at the end of the book the way she was treated at the beginning or was it a consequence of her perception and subsequent treatment of others? Thanks, Kemper, for the exercise! I look forward to reading others' opinions! Julie From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 18:34:51 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 18:34:51 -0000 Subject: Basillisk - Links - Falling Out of Hogwarts 4 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127503 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/12/2005 12:30:45 PM Pacific Standard Time, > > rowanbrookt at h... writes: > > > > I was re-reading HPATCOS last night and wondered how did Salazar > > Slytherin plan for the basillisk to only kill muggle born witches > > and wizards. ... Any ideas? > Hannah: > Well, this is supposing that he really did intend for it to > kill Muggle-borns. There was some interesting speculation recently > on this list that Slytherin did not in fact intend that at all, > rather that he left the snake to protect the school in the event of > an attack. > > Assuming he did intend it to kill Muggle-borns, I think it was down > to the one the controlling it - Slytherin's heir - to identify the > Muggle-borns and tell the snake who to attack. ... > > Hannah bboyminn: Appologise for not adding to the discussion, but my views are well documented in the thread that Hannah referred to- Date: Sat Mar 12, 2005 12:24 pm Subject: Re:The Falling-Out of the Hogwarts Four http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/125964 Date: Mon Mar 14, 2005 2:47 am Subject: Re: The Falling-Out of the Hogwarts Four http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126025 Date: Wed Mar 23, 2005 3:10 pm Subject: Re:The Falling-Out of the Hogwarts Four - Salazar & Basilisk http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126493 As always, don't just read my posts. This is a very long thread and Yahoo limits the number of replies list below a given post to 9. There are many more than 9 post/replies spanning well of a weeks time. Be sure to go up and down the thread and read what others had to say on the subject. These post links plus the continuing discussion in that thread should answer a lot of your questions, and hopefully raise new ideas and questions. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 13 18:54:01 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 14:54:01 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127504 Geoff: > I have been married for nearly 34 years and am /still/ left clueless > by my wife's take on events from time to time; the female mind just > doesn't touch base with mine. :-) Tammy: > -Tammy, who wanted to post a "me too" to bboyminn's post and add that > it's not all that hard to get into the male mind :P I suppose I see this sort of attitude enough that I ought not be so shocked by it anymore, but every time I see the kind of "women are complicated, and we poor, silly boys will never understand them / boys are really quite simple, and we girls have them all figured out" reasoning, I am just . . . boggled. It is really quite intriguing that our male-centric culture would come up with a stereotype which basically says men are simple and stupid and women are complicated and savvy. Especially when it's, well . . . incredibly and demonstratively untrue and insupportable. Geoff, I'm sorry, but I'm going to pick on you for a bit. Please bear with me, it's all in the spirit of friendly debate. ^_^ I just think that this particular stereotype is one that people often take for granted without ever really examining it. Are you seriously saying that when your wife has a different opinion or perspective that you don't 'get', it's because she's female? If you can't see her side of things, it's because Men Just Can't Understand Women? Don't your male friends ever have opinions that you can't understand? It that because they're from a different race/nationality/religion than you? Does there have to be a tangible *reason* why people sometimes have different ideas or can't/won't understand each other? In fact, are there truly any situations in which people are *actually* incapable of at least looking at an issue from someone else's perspective? Maybe the whole thing has to do with the fact that women, by necessity in a male-centric culture, so often *have* to think of things from a "male" perspective, while it is unnecessary, even undesirable and taboo, for a man to try to think from a "woman's" perspective. Anyway, to bring this slightly back on topic -- I definitely see this stereotype in the Potterverse, along with the stereotype that Women Know About Feelings And Men Don't. Furthermore, they are presented so *casually* -- as if they were undeniable truth -- again, it just seems absurd to me. Laura (who is left stunned at the apparent eagerness some men -- including many of her college professors -- to declare themselves stupid and hopeless.) From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 19:45:11 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:45:11 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127505 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Dysisgirl wrote: > > > > > > As I was studying the excerpt in Book 5 where Harry breaks into > > Snape's thoughts, I noticed something odd. "A greasy haired > > teenager sat alone in a dark bedroom, pointing his wand at the > > ceiling, shooting down flies..." [US Verion, Book 5, pg. 592] > > > > > Of course, we don't know if teenage Snape is using the Killing curse > (or if it's even Snape, for that matter...). But we haven't been > introduced to many other spells that can create those same effects. > > Assuming that it is Snape, and that he is using the Killing > Curse as a teenager, we have to wonder (1) where he learned it, (2) > how powerful he must have been, and (3) why was a teenage kid using an > Unforgivable Curse when he knew full well that the Ministry had and > Underage Wizarding Policy. > > a_svirn: 1) Could have been a Stunning Spell, 2) nothing out of ordinary in that case (unless you count his good marksmanship), 3) wizards attain their majority at sevenTEEN a_svirn From jferer at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 19:59:56 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 19:59:56 -0000 Subject: Character Psychological Profiles - Umbridge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127506 -Kemper: " I have a new question. Umbridge. She wears a lot of rings. For me, this is almost always a sign of a Borderline or a Histrionic. But she doesn't quite read/feel like one. She does seem to have a psychosis. Maybe bipolar?" Julie: "Umbridge is an odd bird. As a professor of mine said, some people are hard to diagnosis because "Mean Old Battle Axe" ain't in the DSM! I do not think she is Bipolar because I do not see the fluctuation of her mood. Even if she were a "mean manic," I see her presentation as too consistent to be Bipolar. Could she be Dysthymic? It is a chronic depressive condition, with hers being expressed as irritable, unhappy, and generally nasty? I don't know." Umbridge seems to be at the extreme end of a path Percy seems well started on. She's an apparatchik. Having no moral compass of here own, she's turned over her conscience and sense of right and wrong to someone else, in this case Fudge and "the Ministry" as if it was a higher power. She will not follow her own path, only someone else's. The official facts are her facts, the official truth her truth. Thinking is not required. The world is full of people like this, and always had been; Henry II asked "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" Some knights heard it, and Thomas ? Becket died. Umbridge would have approved. Heck, she tried it with Dementors. The swords would have been kinder. Jodl, Keitel, and Eichmann "just followed orders." JKR clearly doesn't approve of people without their own consciences. It's a kind of reflected sociopathy, an amorality come by second-hand. Jim Ferer From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 20:26:00 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 20:26:00 -0000 Subject: Character Psychological Profiles - Umbridge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127507 > Umbridge seems to be at the extreme end of a path Percy seems well > started on. She's an apparatchik. Having no moral compass of here > own, she's turned over her conscience and sense of right and wrong to > someone else, in this case Fudge and "the Ministry" as if it was a > higher power. She will not follow her own path, only someone else's. > The official facts are her facts, the official truth her truth. > Thinking is not required. > > The world is full of people like this, and always had been; Henry II > asked "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?" Some knights > heard it, and Thomas ? Becket died. Umbridge would have approved. > Heck, she tried it with Dementors. The swords would have been kinder. > Jodl, Keitel, and Eichmann "just followed orders." JKR clearly > doesn't approve of people without their own consciences. > > It's a kind of reflected sociopathy, an amorality come by second- hand. > > Jim Ferer Reflected sociopathy...I like that term. How is that different from "Closet Narcissism"? I certainly agree with your statement regarding those of whom JKR disapproves. I had been thinking along those lines as I was thinking about the similarities of the people we have discussed thus far -- Snape, Malfoy, Lockhart, now Umbridge. Julie From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 20:26:13 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 20:26:13 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127508 >>Laura: >Maybe the whole thing has to do with the fact that women, by necessity in a male-centric culture, so often *have* to think of things from a "male" perspective, while it is unnecessary, even undesirable and taboo, for a man to try to think from a "woman's" perspective. >Anyway, to bring this slightly back on topic -- I definitely see this stereotype [men are simple and stupid and women are complicated and savvy] in the Potterverse, along with the stereotype that Women Know About Feelings And Men Don't. Furthermore, they are presented so *casually* -- as if they were undeniable truth -- again, it just seems absurd to me.< Betsy: Interesting, because I don't see those stereotypes *at all* in the Potterverse. Lord, take a look at Snape for a perfect example. I would also say JKR has made James into quite a complex character as well. Hermione may get the proper forms of courtship better than Harry and Ron, but that's because she got into that game earlier than they did. JKR has never had Hermione seem more understanding than Ron of Harry. (In fact, there's one scene in one of the books where Hermione thinks they should leave Harry alone to stew in his depression, and Ron more correctly offers to take Harry flying. Can't remember which book it's in. But it took place at the Burrow.) I'd also argue that Dumbledore shows more emotional understanding than McGonagall, and Lupin shows more than Molly, during times that Harry is upset. I'm not saying that any of those characters are better than the others, but I am saying that JKR has definitely *not* left matters of a certain complexity up to women. I don't recall, ever, Hermione (or any of the women) being encouraged to think from a male perspective. Whereas Harry is encouraged, by both JKR and characters within the Potterverse, to see things from the female's POV. Just to give a few, off the top of my head, examples: Hermione encourages Harry to see something from Cho Chang's POV; Harry has a sudden sympathy with his Aunt Petunia (which never happens with his Uncle); McGonagall encourages him to understand the underlying message behind Umbridge's speech. All of those examples were in OotP, but I think they're fairly consistent with the rest of the books. Part of it, of course, is that as the story is told from Harry's POV, he has to have some empathy towards the female mind if we're to get the female characters at all. I also disagree with the "Women know feelings, Men don't" stereotype being in the books. Again, Harry has a pretty good grasp on what others are feeling. The worst character at that particular skill is Hermione. That whole thing with Lavender's dead rabbit - Hermione was *terrible*. There was no empathy at all. She took Lavender's grief and tried to use it to prove a point. (As to her knowledge about Cho Chang - she didn't intuit that stuff, she listened in on bathroom gossip, and Ravenclaw gossip in her classes, I'm quite sure.) Heck, I'd say *Ron* has a better idea of what people are feeling than Hermione. He gets emotional and has a hard time expressing what he's thinking (and isn't that a role reversal!) but he's usually got a pretty good clue on how the folks he cares about are feeling. Honestly, I don't see any gender stereotyping going on at all. There are *character* stereotypings a plenty. But I've yet to see anything that rises to the level of: This is what girls are for and this is what boys are for and may the two never mingle. Betsy From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 20:29:45 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 20:29:45 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127509 I'm sitting here once more wrapping up the series with Book 5, pondering Harry Potter-ness and I was ruminating further on my hypothesis Harry might go across the veil (after Sirius?) in Book 6 (or maybe Book 7...I'm not fussy). It's apparent what lies beyond the veil apparently "kills" anyone who crosses it is an underworld of sorts, a backdoor death, if you will. In Greco-Roman mythology several characters died this way, by going directly to the underworld, instead of dying of some sickness or accident, etc. It is generally assumed those who pass to the underworld are irretrievably dead...BUT, if classical mythology is anything to go by, that has some (but ver-r-r-r-ry few) notable exceptions. Some tidbits: Fluffy is a three headed dog Hagrid got from a "Greek chappie" down at the pub and in mythology the gate to the underworld was guarded by Cerberus, a three headed dog. It was Hercules (or Herakles) who went down to the underworld and got past the dog. Orpheus was a mythical Greek poet and musician, son of Apollo and a muse (Calliope, if I remember what the good Jesuit fathers tried to bop into my head 25 years ago). Orpheus married Eurydice, who died from the bite of a snake(!). Orpheus went down to Hades to bring her back and her return to life was granted IF he could walk ahead of her without looking back. That's right, he looked back and Eurydice was irretrievably lost. In the Odyssey, Circe tells Odysseus he must go to the house of Hades and Persephone* to seek out the prophet, Teiresias. Much wackiness happens to Odysseus down there. Also Aeneas left Troy and while in the process of settling down in Italy and becoming the ancestor of Romulus and Remus(!) who were the founders of Rome after being nursed by a wolf (!), had to meander down to the Underworld and Theseus** (whom Hercules was meant to fetch, IIRC) did as well. Discuss. -J. *Persephone wound up as a resident of the underworld because she ate pomegranate seeds Hades gave her. In Book 5, Harry ruins his Strengthening Solution by adding--you guessed it--pomegranate to it, when he wasn't supposed to add pomegranate ANYTHING to that potion. ** The seat in the trial room that seizes the sitter is very reminiscent of the seat Hades had which bound Theseus. From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Apr 13 21:28:52 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 21:28:52 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127510 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote: > Geoff: > > I have been married for nearly 34 years and am /still/ left clueless > > by my wife's take on events from time to time; the female mind just > > doesn't touch base with mine. :-) Laura: > Geoff, I'm sorry, but I'm going to pick on you for a bit. Please bear > with me, it's all in the spirit of friendly debate. ^_^ I just think > that this particular stereotype is one that people often take for > granted without ever really examining it. Are you seriously saying > that when your wife has a different opinion or perspective that you > don't 'get', it's because she's female? If you can't see her side of > things, it's because Men Just Can't Understand Women? Don't your male > friends ever have opinions that you can't understand? Laura:(who is left stunned at the apparent eagerness some men -- > including many of her college professors -- to declare themselves > stupid and hopeless.) Geoff: Who said that I am declaring myself stupid and hopeless? I didn't. I also object to being called a stereotype. I said that "from time to time" I can't see my wife's point of view - /not/ every time we look at a thing differently. I was trying to pont out that your comment about guys being clueless is something that surfaces all through life but not every hour of every day. I didn't discuss whether I may find myself at a loss with other folk - male or female. The fact is that men and women often process facts and events in a different way, practically, emotionally and intellectually. It doesn't imply any difference in status or intelligence, it is because males and females /do/ see things in a different light. If you're going to say "men don't understand women", then you must accept the reverse as well. To take a (possibly) fatuous example, I can't see why my other half wants to watch "Neighbours" every day and she can't understand why I want to spend time fine-tuning my website and having long email discussions with my two sons on technicalities about the Net. Have you read "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" which looks at some of the differences in approach to matters by men and women? The sexes are different. It would be boring if we all thought precisely the same, bearing in mind that in my earlier reply, I also pointed up the fact that boys do not all think the same way. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 13 22:23:21 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 22:23:21 -0000 Subject: Character Psych Profiles - Umbridge = Insecure! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127511 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: > > -Kemper: >" I have a new question. Umbridge. She wears a lot of rings. > For me, this is almost always a sign of a Borderline or a > Histrionic. > Julie: > "Umbridge is an odd bird. ... Could she be Dysthymic? > It is a chronic depressive condition, with hers being expressed as > irritable, unhappy, and generally nasty? I don't know." > Jim: > > Umbridge seems to be at the extreme end of a path Percy seems well > started on. She's an apparatchik. Having no moral compass of here > own, she's turned over her conscience and sense of right and wrong > to someone else, ...edited... > > It's a kind of reflected sociopathy, an amorality come by > second-hand. > > Jim Ferer bboyminn: Well, I certainly can commnent with the same depth of psychological insight and knowledge that others are displaying; the best I can do is give you my opinion. I think Umbridge is desperately and pathologically INSECURE. She is insecure about her looks, so she compensates with her sickly sweet voice, her girly-girly clothes, and her affect of a sweet pleasant demeanor. And rightly she should since her true personality is mean and exceedingly umpleasant. The sweet girly-girly look and demeanor are a mask she wears to cover the things in herself that she fear others will not like. And again, she is right, when most people see beyond the mask, they don't like her. Another part of her deep insecurity is her fear that she is a mediocre witch with mediocre magical powers, and again, she is right. So, like many, she compensates for her deep sense of personal and magical powerlessness by seeking power. It's s form of self-validation. She wields her desire for validating power like sword, and has no hesitation in cutting down anyone who gets in her way. Her many false faces and her quest for validating power have been very effective. She has managed to cozy up to the top man in the wizard world, and that association with Fudge validates her sense of personal power. Although, like many who seek power for power's sake, the more she has, the more she fears she doesn't, which starts a never ending cascade of demanding more validations of her power. Sending the Dementors after Harry is a perfect example. More than Harry's statements, Harry mere existance threatened Umbridge's self-illusion and carefully worn mask of power, more than that, by threatening Fudge, Harry threatened the very source of power that validated Umbridge. If the Ministry lost Fudge, or Fudge's power and influence diminish, then Umbridge loses her total sense of Self. So, by even threatening Fudge in the smallest way, Harry inadvertently threatened Umbridge in the greatest and most desperate and dangerous way possible. This same thread of self-validation power, can be seen in Umbridge's reign at Hogwarts. Everything she does is about establishing and preserving her identity and power. If she allows those factors of her Self to faulter, then she is force to face a desperate truth that she will avoid at any cost, and that truth is that she is a weak, fat, ugly, stupid, ineffective, powerless pathetic excuse for a witch and human being. And trust me, she would kill you before she would allow you to make her face that truth. She lives to preserve an illusion that hides a truth she is psychotically unwilling and unable to face. Don't know what the term for that is, but that's how I see her. She is hyper-super-extremely over-compensating for the weaknesses she fears in herself. You heard it here first. Steve/bboyminn From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Apr 13 22:28:47 2005 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 23:28:47 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Home-Schooling in the Wizard World (long) References: <1113266589.11978.77683.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000401c54078$2abb5360$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 127512 Greenfirespike wrote: >After following several wonderful threads from the past week, a >question began to reemerge regarding education within the WW. Are >any wizards home-schooled? If this at all interests you, please JKR is of the view that junior school age children are mainly educated at home, so it's clearly part of the culture for it to happen at that age. But there is another option over and above the ones that you mention, and it starts from the question: what do young people in the WW need to know in order to live their lives? They need the relevant domestic magical knowledge to live in a magical home, and I'd suggest that they get it at home. Where Muggleborns get it I don't know: there's no suggestion that Hermione and the other Muggleborns have extra classes in basic survival. Maybe they have an extra book on their lists called "Welcome to the Wizarding World: a Guide for Newcomers" or something like that. And they also need to know the things that they will use to make their living. There is a school of thought that those children who don't need the specific skills in magic that the Hogwarts curriculum offers, get their education by apprenticeship, that there is a specific set of charms/potions/spells that relate to being a miner, a farmer, a wandmaker, or whatever - once you know those, you are set up for life and don't really _need_ to know about Goblin rebellions or care of Mandrakes. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com Thu Apr 14 00:36:18 2005 From: ConstanceVigilance at gmail.com (Constance Vigilance) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 00:36:18 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127513 --- jmgarciaiii wrote: > > I'm sitting here once more wrapping up the series with Book 5, > pondering Harry Potter-ness and I was ruminating further on my > hypothesis Harry might go across the veil (after Sirius?) in Book 6 > (or maybe Book 7...I'm not fussy). > > It's apparent what lies beyond the veil apparently "kills" anyone > who crosses it is an underworld of sorts, a backdoor death, if you > will. ConstanceVigilance (me): The Veil. I think it is the biggest unresolved artifact in the series thus far. I would not be surprised to see Harry go through the veil, but my money would be in Book 7. Since "going through the veil" seems to imply a permanent death, what would happen if a ghost went through the veil? I think that it is highly likely that we will see Nearly Headless Nick going through the veil in a future book, as he seems somewhat regretful that he didn't have the courage the first time to finish his death. His rejected application to the Headless Hunt might cause him to realize that he is a misfit as a ghost, and given a properly heroic reason, he could easily be convinced to Cross Over. We can probably assume that when living or dead people cross the veil, they are gone for good. But what would happen if one who is neither living nor dead goes through? I'm referring to Peeves. As a poltergeist, he is not the remnants of a living person. Nor is he a person in living form. Could he pass through the veil and return unscathed? Now, jmgarciaiii: > Fluffy is a three headed dog Hagrid got from a "Greek chappie" down > at the pub and in mythology the gate to the underworld was guarded > by Cerberus, a three headed dog. It was Hercules (or Herakles) who > went down to the underworld and got past the dog. > ConstanceVigilance: That darn medium-that-must-not-be-named. Changed it from "Greek chappie" to "Irish fellow" and totally destroyed the reference. But Fluffy is an interesting loose end. Harry and friends have already gotten past the Greek guard of the underworld once. jmgarciaiii: > > *Persephone wound up as a resident of the underworld because she ate pomegranate seeds Hades gave her. In Book 5, Harry ruins his Strengthening Solution by adding--you guessed it--pomegranate to it, when he wasn't supposed to add pomegranate ANYTHING to that potion. > ConstanceVigilance: I didn't notice that during my readings. But it is a good catch, JM. As I recall Persephone was not supposed to eat anything but she ate 6 pomegranate pips. Her punishment was to spend one month in Hades for each pip. The world dies with her for those 6 months, giving us winter. So, Persephone + pomegranates = partial bad news. Perhaps Harry + pomegranate = Not Completely Bad News, too? Maybe he will be able to "die" and come back? OK, I'm reaching. I don't want Harry to die, but I think we are given many hints that it is coming. Thanks for the thoughtful post, JM. ~Constance Vigilance, who notices that Quirrell also got past the guard of the underworld, but that doesn't mean anything. From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 01:55:09 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 01:55:09 -0000 Subject: Character Psych Profiles - Umbridge = Insecure! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127514 Steve:"She lives to preserve an illusion that hides a truth she is psychotically unwilling and unable to face. Don't know what the term for that is, but that's how I see her. She is hyper-super-extremely over-compensating for the weaknesses she fears in herself." I believe it's the insecurity you speak of that leads people like Umbridge to become toadies and sycophants. People with a stronger sense of self wouldn't be as likely to hitch their wagons to someone like Fudge the way she has. They certainly wouldn't have to affirm themselves by her cruelty. I have no background in psychology, certainly none in the DSM, but I've seen her type before. Jim Ferer From lhuntley at fandm.edu Thu Apr 14 02:11:15 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 22:11:15 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5081a25ecdaa6bca41740cae0d3b6a50@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 127515 Me: > Laura (who is left stunned at the apparent eagerness some men -- > including many of her college professors -- to declare themselves > stupid and hopeless.) Geoff: > Who said that I am declaring myself stupid and hopeless? I didn't. I > also object to being called a stereotype. I'm really sorry. I was trying not to offend you, and I see that I pretty much failed. I'm not always incredibly good at phrasing things sensitively, and I have this horrible habit of using stronger language than I really mean without properly explaining myself. I'll try to be more clear on the "stupid and hopeless" comment, which was not so much about you (as I do not know you very well) and more about a large number of men I know personally (college professors, friends, employers, etc.). These are people who would usually bristle at the implication that there is something that they are incapable of understanding by virtue of their sex, but for some reason are perfectly eager to write-off so many traits and ideas (some real, some imagined) of women as completely foreign and incomprehensible to them. > I said that "from time to time" I can't see my wife's point of view - > /not/ every time we look at a thing differently. I didn't mean to imply that you could *never* see things from your wife's POV, I was just questioning why her sex would ever be a factor in whether or not you could understand her. I also realize that your comment was made very casually, but "the female mind just doesn't touch base with mine," implies that you think there is, in some way, an undeniable breach between male thought and female thought. I'm certainly not going to say that you aren't entitled to think that, it's just that I disagree. > I was trying to pont out that your comment about guys being clueless > is something > that surfaces all through life but not every hour of every day. All I was asking is *why* does this 'cluelessness' need to be gendered? > I didn't discuss whether I may find myself at a loss with other folk - > male or female. No, I was trying to draw an analogy. To me, saying you can't understand something someone thinks because of their sex is pretty much the same as saying that you can't understand their belief/opinion/idea/whatever because of their race. IMHO, both of these arguments are fallacious. > The fact is that men and women often process facts and events in a > different way, practically, emotionally and intellectually. It > doesn't imply any difference in status or intelligence, it is because > males and females /do/ see things in a different light. From this comment, I'd say we disagree on a very fundamental level. I also think the possibility of one of us changing the other's mind is very slim, if we disagree on such a basic thing, but I would still like to hear your thoughts on the matter. > If you're going to say "men don't understand women", then you must > accept the > reverse as well. Well, part of the stereotype that I was talking about was the notion that women have got men all figured out (which I also disagree with). I appreciate that you're at least consistent with your POV. > To take a (possibly) fatuous example, I can't see > why my other half wants to watch "Neighbours" every day and she can't > understand why I want to spend time fine-tuning my website and having > long email discussions with my two sons on technicalities about the > Net. But are these personal preferences of yours specific to your *gender*? If so, why? And how do you explain all the women who hate "Neighbours" and all the men who would rather die than discuss computers? > Have you read "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" which looks > at some of the differences in approach to matters by men and women? I have, and I'll be perfectly frank here, so be warned: I thought it was the biggest load of pseudo-science pop psychology I have ever laid eyes on, and that's going up against a lot of stiff competition (including the claim that PMSing women crave chocolate because of the serotonin it contains -- nevermind the blood-brain barrier and the fact that there *is* no serotonin in milk chocolate and very, very little in dark chocolate). Er . . . nevermind that last bit. My point is that I *don't* trust the "research" done in that book, I don't think its conclusions are particularly valid, and I think the ideas it espouses do more to *hurt* male-female communication than to help it. > The sexes are different. It would be boring if we all thought > precisely the same, bearing in mind that in my earlier reply, I also > pointed up the fact that boys do not all think the same way. Well, I guess it just seems to me like saying that girls have a certain way of thinking and boys have a different way is more of a *restriction* on individuality. The idealist in me just wants people to able to be themselves, even if being themselves goes against the cultural definitions of feminine and masculine. I know that people *can* still "go against the grain", as it were, but I just think our culture makes it discouragingly difficult and even painful and shameful at times. > Eee . . . sorry again. *ducks* Laura From tinglinger at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 02:28:57 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 02:28:57 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127516 Constance Vigilance ------------------- The VeilI would not be surprised to see Harry go through the veil, but my money would be in Book 7. Since "going through the veil" seems to imply a permanent death, what would happen if a ghost went through the veil? tinglinger I would think that a ghost would end up just like Nick did when he saw the basilisk --- COS didnt go into detail as to how Nick recovered by "drinking" mandrake juice, just that he did. However, if a ghost did go through the veil and there was no recovery, he just might die, or ultimately be freed if the veil was ever changed to two-way..... Philip Pullman tried to address similar issues in The Amber Spyglass, the third volume of His Dark Materials series. Constance We can probably assume that when living or dead people cross the veil, they are gone for good. But what would happen if one who is neither living nor dead goes through? I'm referring to Peeves. As a poltergeist, he is not the remnants of a living person. Nor is he a person in living form. Could he pass through the veil and return unscathed? tinglinger Or for that matter, how about Voldemort? Is he really dead or alive? That might explain Dumbledores famous "gleam" - before he got Harry's blood, LV would be able to go back and forth since "he didnt have enough life in him to die" {per Hagrid}. Now that he has Harry's life in him, the veil would be like Roach Motel to him {so to speak}............. tinglinger who has a budding website discussing just these type of theories... Latest - Sirius' activity prior to Voldemort's visit of GH & Importance of little pieces of paper in the WW http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 14 03:23:31 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 03:23:31 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127517 SSSusan: Oh, I'm afraid I'm fired up & ready to go again! ;-) Naama: > Yes, Snape is very hung up on respect - but is not hung up at all > on admiration, IMO. ...I do remember Snape overhearing Harry and > Ron bad-mouthing him, and he doesn't care - he seems amused, if > anything. I also agree that while pleased with Draco's flattery, > he doesn't seek it. SSSusan: Possibly, though I would maintain that we really don't know whether he seeks Draco's flattery or not. When Draco went on about how he (Snape) should be Headmaster, maybe one reason he did so was because he's been rewarded for past comments along those lines? You make a fair point about Snape's reaction to the students. I have maintained all along that Snape may crave admiration for *certain* things [e.g., his skills and talents] and from *certain* people more than others, in large part from Dumbledore and/or his adult peers. More on that later. Re: his interactions with students, there is this from http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php?artID=86 : "Being in a position of authority secures the sources of Narcissistic Supply [excessive admiration, adulation, attention and affirmation - or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be notorious]. Fed by the awe, fear, subordination, admiration, adoration and obedience of his underlings ? the narcissist thrives in such circumstances. As far as the narcissist is concerned, there is no moral dimension to the issue of abusing others ? only a pragmatic one: will he be punished for doing so?" SSSusan: To me, this sounds quite like the typical Snape classroom behavior. I think it's noteworthy that being feared or being seen as notorious by underlings is considered an acceptable alternative to receiving adulation or admiration. Naama: > "admiration" from dictionary.com: "a feeling of delighted approval > and liking"... As adults, we don't need admiration (although we > enjoy it when we get it) - but we all demand, to some degree, > respect. As a need, admiration belongs to childhood, respect to > adulthood. SSSusan: I'm not saying that dictionary definition of admiration is wrong, and I'm not arguing whether it belongs to adulthood or childhood; I'm simply going with what the DSM-IV presents us as traits upon which to base an NPD diagnosis. I totally agree with you that Snape demands respect from his students. OTOH, I also think he does want admiration as well -- definitely from DD, likely from his peers, and possibly a certain degree from his students (think of the "you should be thanking me on bended knee" comment to Harry). On this issue of the adults in his environment, something which was brought up earlier by Mara is that two different people whom one might class as narcissistic can have different manifestations of it. Lockhart, for instance, seems to crave admiration from EVERY witch or wizard he's ever met. Beyond what I've said above about his interactions with students and how even those could be seen as satisfying the need for Narcissistic Supply, it may well be that Snape craves his affirmation and admiration primarily from his colleagues and especially DD. For one thing, per http://samvak.tripod.com/npd.html : "Narcissists are either 'cerebral' (derive their narcissistic supply from their intelligence or academic achievements) - or 'somatic' (derive their narcissistic supply from their physique, exercise, physical or sexual prowess and romantic or physical 'conquests')." I, um, see Snape in the cerebral category, obviously. ;-) A bit of potential support for this idea that Snape expects different "support" or supply from different people comes from http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php?artID=85 : "The narcissist is no better or worse (morally speaking) than others. But he lacks the ability to empathise precisely because he is obsessed with the maintenance of his delicate inner balance through the (ever-growing) consumption of Narcissistic Supply. The narcissist rates people around him. First, he conducts a binary test: can this or that person provide him with Narcissistic Supply? As far as the narcissist is concerned, those who fail this simple test do not exist. They are two-dimensional cartoon figures. Their feelings, needs and fears are of no interest or importance." [Harry??] "Those persons who filtered through, are then subjected to a meticulous examination and probing of the volume and quality of the Narcissistic Supply that is likely to emanate from them. The narcissist nurtures and cultivates these people. He caters to their needs, desires, and wishes. He considers their emotions. He encourages those aspects of their personality that are likely to enhance their ability to provide him with his much needed supply. In this very restricted sense, he regards and treats them as `human'. This is his way of `maintaining and servicing' his Supply Sources." SSSusan: McGonagall, Dumbledore and other staff members?? The description is a little stronger than what we see with Snape, perhaps, but we also don't see what happens in the staff room, yet what we *do* see of the interactions between Snape & McG and many between Snape & DD could support it. Pippin suggested the possibility that Snape is more sadistic than narcissistic. Here is some information which might address that. >From http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php? artID=166 : "A narcissist would tend to display the sadistic aspect of his personality in one of two cases: 1. That the very acts of sadism would generate Narcissistic Supply to be consumed by the narcissist (`I inflict pain, therefore I am superior') or 2. That the victims of his sadism are still his only or major sources of Narcissistic Supply but are perceived by him to be intentionally frustrating and withholding it. Sadistic acts are his way of punishing them for not being docile, obedient, admiring and adoring as he expects them to be in view of his uniqueness, cosmic significance and special entitlement. ...The narcissist tortures and abuses as a means to punish and to reassert superiority and grandiosity. The sadist does so for pure (usually, sexual) enjoyment." SSSusan: This would imply that, unless Snape is garnering sexual enjoyment from being sadistic [anybody wanna go there??], he's more in alignment with the narcissist. Note the potential reason for behaving sadistically in wanting to punish students for "intentionally frustrating or withholding" Narcissistic Supply. Several posters have suggested that Snape treats Harry & Neville the way he does precisely because he *is* frustrated by their refusal to take him seriously and to value what he does. If Snape sees Harry & Neville as deliberately not doing what they're asked, deliberately not paying attention, intentionally disregarding him, then one might suspect a narcissistic Snape to behave sadistically in return. > > SSSusan earlier: I think it *might* be possible to argue that > > anyone willing to be a Death Eater might have this attribute > > [interpersonal exploitation]? Naama: > I don't agree with your last speculation. The narcissist > exploitativeness arises from a deep lack of an authentic response > to other human beings as specific persons. Think of Lockhart and > Voldemort. > Snape, on the other hand, responds to people authentically, > emotionally (passionately, rather) and specifically - of course, > he's all twisted and bitter and full of rage - but he doesn't have > that unique disconnect that (I believe) characterises the > narcissist. SSSusan: I'm not sure how I feel about the suggestion that Snape responds to people *authentically.* But as for the issue of exploitation, narcissists use other people to get what they want without caring about the cost to the other people. I think this is congruent with what it would likely take to be a Death Eater. >From http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php? artID=85 : "The narcissist has no time or energy for anything, except the next narcissistic fix, NO MATTER WHAT THE PRICE AND WHO IS TRAMPLED UPON." SSSusan: Now, I don't believe that Snape is or was ever *this* bad ? that ALL he cares about is a narcissistic fix ? but if this describes what is meant by the interpersonal exploitation characteristic of NPD, it seems compatible with what Des would be expected to be like. Naama: > If you look at the Snape-goes-ballistic incidents, they are much > better understood as hurt pride/dignity (i.e., being disrespected) > than hurt ego (not receiving admiration). SSSusan: Hurt pride/dignity **or** indignation, I would say. Indignation, particularly over what is seen as a personal affront, would fit, imo. Naama: > I think this is a major point against the narcissistic Snape > theory. The narcissistic self got "stuck", so to speak, in the > admiration stage. Snape is healthier than that - his need for > respect is exaggerated and obviously a result of insecurities, but > still much closer to normal adult needs than a narcissist. SSSusan: Again, this is quite possible, Naama. I may have read too much into this whole thing. Then again, I might not have. ;-) As I said before, I think once we know why Snape left Voldy, we'll have a better chance of knowing whether Snape is a fairly healthy, close-to- normal adult who just doesn't like to have his pride/dignity assaulted, or whether he more closely fits someone who's narcissistic. I'm afraid I'm still leaning towards the latter. Siriusly Snapey Susan From kking0731 at gmail.com Thu Apr 14 03:32:34 2005 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 03:32:34 -0000 Subject: Unforgivable Curses and Underage Wizardry In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127518 Carol: Why weren't the stunning spells detected? The same reason that he was able to practice jinxes and curses at home without being detected (before he was even legally of age to buy a wand)--his parents were both magical and it would have been impossible for the MoM to know who performed those spells. (What I want to know is whose wand little Sevvie used to learn those hexes! Or maybe he got his wand in January when he turned eleven and learned them all before he went to school September 1!) Anyway, clearly the MoM watches some households more closely than others. There were, we can be pretty sure, no Muggles in the Snape family household or anywhere nearby to witness the magic, and who knows? >snip< Snow: Or maybe both of his parents weren't magical and his house, like Mrs. Figgs, isn't monitored or detected as a magical house. We have been told by JKR that dear Severus is not a pureblood (I believe in the World Book Day chat) but, imo, could have been a product of a squid, which I particularly have voiced my opinion on the likelihood of Filch being Snape's father. It would give Snape the incentive to over excel as a youth to allow himself to be seen as worthy as a wizard who has the correct prestigious background to be appreciated or acknowledged. Always trying to prove himself worthy kind of like being disappointed in being honored for catching Sirius. I think it fits Snape's profile Snow From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 03:59:13 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 03:59:13 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127519 Naama: Yes, Snape is very hung up on respect - but is not hung up at all on admiration, IMO. ...I do remember Snape overhearing Harry and Ron bad-mouthing him, and he doesn't care - he seems amused, if anything. I also agree that while pleased with Draco's flattery, he doesn't seek it. Alla: I meant to respond to this part of Naama's post earlier, but might as well do it within Susan's post,since I am finding myself more and more in agreement with her every time she defends this theory.:-) So, question to Naama - could you please refer me to the incident where Snape seems amused by Ron and Harry badmouthing him. I am not being sarcastic, but I cannot remember anything of the sorts. The only incident with similar circumstances which comes to my mind and I am not sure whether you were talking about this one is when Ron and Harry arrive to school in CoS and rush to Sorting. "Hang on... Harry muttered to Ron. "There;s an emty chair at the staff table... Where's Snape?" ... "Maybe he's ill" said Ron hopefully. "Maybe he's left," said Harry, "because he missed out on the Defense Against Dark Arts job again!" "Or he migh have been sacked!" said Ron enthusiastically. "I mean everyone hates him--" "Or maybe ," said a very cold voice right behind them, "he's waiting to hear why you two didn't arrive on the school train." - CoS, p.78, paperback. If this is the one you are referring to, I see no sign of amusement in Snape's voice, although remark by itself is entertaining to me, sure. But judging by the way Snape deals with it later on, I would say he does care about what he overheard ( IMO only), because he does not really bother like Dumbledore to figure out whay it happened. I mean, sure it WAS dangerous, but I wonder how remarks like this one is going to help to investigate what happened. "So", he said softly, "the train isn't good enough for the famous Harry Potter and his faithful sidekick Weasley. Wanted toa rrive with a bang, did we, boys?" - CoS, p.78. I think ( and this IS a speculation of course) that Snape IS annoyed with boys badmouthing him earlier and now does the same "mature" thing to them. JMO, of course. SSSusan: As I said before, I think once we know why Snape left Voldy, we'll have a better chance of knowing whether Snape is a fairly healthy, close-to-normal adult who just doesn't like to have his pride/dignity assaulted, or whether he more closely fits someone who's narcissistic. I'm afraid I'm still leaning towards the latter. Alla: And I am leaning with you for now :-) , although of course I agree that it could be thrown out when we know why Snape deflected. Sorry for basically snipping all your post, but you are doing such an amazing job. JMO, Alla From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 04:53:06 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 04:53:06 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127520 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > I agree with the end of the piece where Maya suggests that the women > are sometimes *too* You Go Girl! at times, and some real weaknesses > might have been nice and a bit more wellrounded too. And maybe that's why JKR made Harry a boy. She may have well recognized her reluctance to give her women true weaknesses so she concentrated on the men. > > And just 'cause I want to, most favorite line in Maya's essay: "Only > Even Cooler Women can defeat women [...] Harry gets to die of > mortification, Hermione gets to make Rita Skeeter her bitch." > Tonks now: Yes I enjoyed that essay too. She is right. Frankly I don't know why anyone sees any bias against women in the Harry Potter series. I think that JKR has done a good job showing the personality of people as they are in RL. I don't see anything sexist in HP. JKR wrote the books to teach children and male children would not read it unless the hero were male and they thought that the writer was male. Female children will read books by both male and female authors and with both male and female heroes and can identify with either one. Boys on the other hand can't do that. The macho thing is taught very early in a boy's life. Whereas girl have more freedom to just be human. So I don't know what all the fuss is about, really. I forgot the name of the woman who started all of this.. but she said that Hermione was the good girl always on time and prepared with the answers, etc. Well what did she want Hermione to be instead?? Tonks_op From jmrazo at hotmail.com Thu Apr 14 05:32:10 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 05:32:10 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127521 > > Tonks now: I don't see anything sexist in HP. JKR wrote the books to > teach children and male children would not read it unless the hero were > male and they thought that the writer was male. Female children will > read books by both male and female authors and with both male and > female heroes and can identify with either one. Boys on the other hand > can't do that. The macho thing is taught very early in a boy's life. > Whereas girl have more freedom to just be human. I would say that you are wrong about that. It has nothing to do with a 'macho' thing. First of all, if you look in the young adult section of any bookstore you will find almost all of the books geared towards girls and few if any, geared towards boys. Boys and girls have different tastes in reading, but boys as a general rule read less than girls so books that appeal to boys are just fewer in number. I always liked to read and I can remember going to bookstores and struggling to find something to read that boy-centric and wasn't a hardy boys mystery. I would agree with you that boys have a harder time with female protagonists than the opposite, but I would argue that is simply a result of boys finding the events that surround most female protagonists uninteresting while the events around male protagonists more interesting. how many of the young adult series involving girls are about things that boys don't care the slightest bit about? The answer is a lot. But when female protagonists are involved in stories that actually keep them interested, like in my case Nancy Drew stories, boys don't have much of a problem with female leads. my two cents phoenixgod2000 From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 08:18:52 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:18:52 -0000 Subject: Home-Schooling in the Wizard World In-Reply-To: <000401c54078$2abb5360$704b6d51@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127522 Ffred: Maybe they have an extra book on their > lists called "Welcome to the Wizarding World: a Guide for Newcomers" or > something like that. Harry, Dumbledore having known he was living with Muggles, would have gotten that book; therefore it doesn't exist since he didn't get anything of the sort, at least as part of his formal schooling. I'm not saying it couldn't be hidden somewhere in the back of the library, or Hermione's trunk though. ^_^ (She knew the charm to repair his glasses before she entered school right? I don't remember seeing them learn to fix broken things in class.) Chys From tassell at hotmail.com Wed Apr 13 18:12:39 2005 From: tassell at hotmail.com (tassellman) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 18:12:39 -0000 Subject: Transfer Godric's Hollow to Privet Drive In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127523 "schappi02" wrote: > Has anyone an idea, why it tooks one day for Dumbledore and Hagrid to > find Harry in his destroyed home and take him to his aunt and uncle. Mugglenet.com has a fabulous analysis of this one. Go to the Underground Lake editorial link (on the left menu bar) and look for "The Lost Day" editorial. You'll love it! From timregan at microsoft.com Thu Apr 14 08:30:40 2005 From: timregan at microsoft.com (Tim Regan) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 08:30:40 -0000 Subject: Neville is The One In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127524 Hi All, On Feb 26 in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/124028 dumbledore11214 wrote: >>> 7. Do you agree with the possibility that Neville may turn out to be the real prophecy child? <<< I was struck the other day by a series of JKR quotes TLC brought together onto a page about the forthcoming book: http://www.hpandthehalfbloodprince.org/faq.htm At the Edinburgh Book Festival JKR said: >>> There are two questions that I have never been asked but that I should have been asked [...] "Why didn't Voldemort die?" Not, "Why did Harry live?" but, "Why didn't Voldemort die?" The killing curse rebounded, so he should have died. Why didn't he? At the end of Goblet of Fire he says that one or more of the steps that he took enabled him to survive. You should be wondering what he did to make sure that he did not die [...] you should be asking yourself that question, particularly now that you know about the prophesy. <<< So, according to JKR, we should be asking why Voldemort did not die in Godric's Hollow, and we should be asking that question because of the `revelations' contained in the prophesy. Some of you will know why I put `revelations' in quotes. I was really really disappointed by the prophesy. To me it seemed to tell none of the main stakeholders (Dumbledore, Harry, Voldemort, or the reader) anything much new. I put this forward in post http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/82067 It does tell us one thing, of the main contenders to vanquish Voldemort (Dumbledore and now Harry and Neville) Dumbledore cannot, and only one of Harry or Neville can. Back to Godric's Hollow. Voldemort knows the first three clauses of the prophesy. From his spy he knows that 1) The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches . . . 2) born to those who have thrice defied him, 3) born as the seventh month dies . . . and So he narrows the list down to two suspects, Harry and Neville, and goes after the *least* likely (the half-blood) just to confirm his hunch that The One is Neville. Meanwhile his henchmen/women go after Neville's family to prepare the ground. But there's a huge disaster for Voldemort. He *almost* dies. The result of this is that 1) The wizarding world believe Harry is more powerful than Voldemort; and 2) By marking Harry with the scar, Voldemort has convinced Dumbledore that Harry is The One, and so Dumbledore instigates a series of sophisticated Harry protection measures. As a result of these events Voldemort obsesses about getting revenge on Harry, and finds it very very difficult to do so, because of Harry's powers, Dumbledore's powers, and the powers of their collected allies. But Voldemort and Dumbledore missed one fact. In Godric's Hollow an Avada Kedavra went from the baby Harry onto Voldemort. What happened? It failed. Why? Harry is not The One. If he was, Voldemort would be dead. Hence Neville is The One. Cheers, Dumbledad. PS I'm sure this has been done to death already; please point me to your favourite rebuttal or proposal post if it has. From shunrata at gmail.com Wed Apr 13 18:25:27 2005 From: shunrata at gmail.com (Shunra Shunrata) Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2005 21:25:27 +0300 Subject: Umbridge (was: Lucius and Antisocial PD) References: Message-ID: <009301c54056$2e6fc850$0100000a@Imma> No: HPFGUIDX 127525 Kemper: I have a new question. Umbridge. She wears a lot of rings. For me, this is almost always a sign of a Borderline or a Histrionic. But she doesn't quite read/feel like one. She does seem to have a psychosis. Maybe bipolar? Shunra: Huh? Bipolar is an affective disorder - states of alternating mania and depression. Any psychosis is secondary to the affective component. I don't see Umbridge exhibiting either. I am not up on sadism but think it would be a more fruitful direction to ponder. Shunra From mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 14 00:29:07 2005 From: mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net (mallrat42g) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 00:29:07 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127526 I have been saying this for years and years. Ron is going to die. I have thought about it a lot, and everytime I read one of the books, I always notice something that directly, or indirectly points to his death. One thing in the giant ches match in PS/SS, Ron sacrifices himself in order for Harry to move on. He knows that Harry is a better wizard, and the only way he can help Harry is by risking himself for Harry. I know that this example is a little off, but it stands out. When Harry and Ron are reading their tea cups in PoA, Ron gives up and says he is going to ignore whatever they say, even if they say "Die Ron, die." It's a little off, but a lot of times, Ron says something that eventually happens. It's like he jinxes himself. Again when he is taken in Gof, he is the thing that Harry will miss most. Ron is like a brother to Harry, he is his only true friend, besides Hermione. Sure, he spends tons of time withe Hermione, but there is not the same bond between her and harry as there is Ron and Harry. I think that Ron's death is the only thing that can motivate Harry enough to kill Voldemort. Sirius' death greatly effected Harry, but belatrix killed Sirius, not Voldemort. The death of Sirius gave enough hate and rage to Harry to want to use an Unforgiveable Curse on a perseon. Sirius was the only person Harry trusted as family. The only person he has now is Ron. Ron's death will be the key in Harry's killing of Voldemort. It is the only way. Ron is the only family Harry has ever truly known. He did not know his parents when he lost them, and he hardly knew Sirius. Ron is all he has, and to loose Ron will be the thing that sends Harry over the edge. Now, If I am wrong than I am wrong, and I'll admit it. But, I will not stand down untill I read it for myself. MallRat42g p.s. Shopping Rules! From doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 09:37:32 2005 From: doddiemoemoe at yahoo.com (doddiemoemoe) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 09:37:32 -0000 Subject: Neville is The One In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127527 > > But Voldemort and Dumbledore missed one fact. In Godric's Hollow an > Avada Kedavra went from the baby Harry onto Voldemort. What > happened? It failed. Why? Harry is not The One. If he was, Voldemort > would be dead. Hence Neville is The One. > > Cheers, > > Dumbledad. > > PS I'm sure this has been done to death already; please point me to > your favourite rebuttal or proposal post if it has. Doddiemoe here: Of course this has been done to death... Neville is far more marked as an "equal" than Harry ever was...scar or not.. Tom Riddle DID have a parent living while he was at hogwarts.. as does neville... but to have a Surviving parent that you have no chance of relating to...well...see what I mean?!??? If I'm wrong...we'll learn more about the "marking" in book six... Unless Peter Pettigrew repaid his life debt to harry already by allowing his godfather to survive...(which I do not think is true at ALL). It would be ever so fitting to have the heir to have a completely VISIBLE scar and the "spare" to have a "NOT-SO-VISIBLE" scar.... For all we know Neville's scar took on the persona of "Trevor the Toad". Thing is...is we pursue the Neville is the one theory...it makes Neville coming into save the day..and it makes a great deal more conspiracies on every characters parts aside from Snape and maybe Hermione's.... There is only one thing I feel certain of in my mind.. THERE IS a reason why snape is horrible to BOTH Neville AND Harry..and JK has pretty much explained why Snape dislikes Harry..but she has never explained why Snape dislikes Neville so much! DD From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Apr 14 11:54:36 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 11:54:36 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127528 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: > Possibly, though I would maintain that we really don't know whether > he seeks Draco's flattery or not. When Draco went on about how he > (Snape) should be Headmaster, maybe one reason he did so was because > he's been rewarded for past comments along those lines? Can I just request something here? Can we base this discussion on actual facts and not on speculation? I may possibly have a brain condition - my neurons are wrongly aligned or something, but I find myself incapable of reconciling fact and speculation - like apples and oranges they don't add up. Regarding the current point - we haven't seen Snape reward Draco for flattering remarks, so I'm sticking as close as I can to the realm of facts and assume that he doesn't generaly do so. > Re: his interactions with students, there is this from > http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php?artID=86 : > > "Being in a position of authority secures the sources of > Narcissistic Supply [excessive admiration, adulation, attention and > affirmation - or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be > notorious]. Fed by the awe, fear, subordination, admiration, > adoration and obedience of his underlings ? the narcissist thrives > in such circumstances. > > As far as the narcissist is concerned, there is no moral dimension > to the issue of abusing others ? only a pragmatic one: will he be > punished for doing so?" > > SSSusan: To me, this sounds quite like the typical Snape classroom > behavior. I think it's noteworthy that being feared or being seen > as notorious by underlings is considered an acceptable alternative > to receiving adulation or admiration. I agree of course that Snape creates an atmosphere of fear. What I don't sense from the books is that he *feeds* on this fear. To illustrate what I mean by feed, think of Umbridge - she is someone who feeds on the fear and pain and humiliation she causes others. While Snape is sadistic and takes some sort of pleasure from inflicting (certain kinds of) pain, I don't get the sense that he *needs* others to regard him with fear in order to maintain his sense of self. >snip> > I totally agree with you that Snape > demands respect from his students. OTOH, I also think he does want > admiration as well -- definitely from DD, likely from his peers, and > possibly a certain degree from his students (think of the "you > should be thanking me on bended knee" comment to Harry). I don't see the last comment as having anything to do with admiration. He thinks Harry should be grateful, i.e., say "thank you", not "oh, you are so wonderful." About DD: we know very little of Snape's relationship with DD, very little of how he feels about him or what he wants from him, emotionally. I certainly can't think of canon supporting the "Snape wants DD to admire him" supposition. What we do know is that Snape is loyal to DD and that DD trusts him. We have very little further insight, I believe, to the deeper aspects of their relationship. > On this issue of the adults in his environment, something which was > brought up earlier by Mara is that two different people whom one > might class as narcissistic can have different manifestations of > it. Lockhart, for instance, seems to crave admiration from EVERY > witch or wizard he's ever met. Beyond what I've said above about > his interactions with students and how even those could be seen as > satisfying the need for Narcissistic Supply, it may well be that > Snape craves his affirmation and admiration primarily from his > colleagues and especially DD. (again) But there is no evidence as to that. We see so very little interaction between Snape and his colleagues. AFAIR, nothing that we have actually seen even hints that Snape craves admiration/approval from his colleagues. He's kind of perpetually snide to everybody - with some fluctutation, but not much. > snip> > The narcissist rates people around him. First, he conducts a binary > test: can this or that person provide him with Narcissistic Supply? > As far as the narcissist is concerned, those who fail this simple > test do not exist. They are two-dimensional cartoon figures. Their > feelings, needs and fears are of no interest or importance." > [Harry??] > > "Those persons who filtered through, are then subjected to a > meticulous examination and probing of the volume and quality of the > Narcissistic Supply that is likely to emanate from them. The > narcissist nurtures and cultivates these people. He caters to their > needs, desires, and wishes. He considers their emotions. He > encourages those aspects of their personality that are likely to > enhance their ability to provide him with his much needed supply. In > this very restricted sense, he regards and treats them as `human'. > This is his way of `maintaining and servicing' his Supply Sources." > > SSSusan: > McGonagall, Dumbledore and other staff members?? The description is > a little stronger than what we see with Snape, perhaps, but we also > don't see what happens in the staff room, yet what we *do* see of > the interactions between Snape & McG and many between Snape & DD > could support it. As I see it, the quote you brought actually supports my position. Snape doesn't "cater" to anybody's "needs, desires and wishes." I feel very strongly that he doesn't regard people with that "binary division" - those who can "feed" his narsissistic need and those that can't. He is generally nasty to people - that's his normal mode. His nastiness varies in intensity, true, but at his least nasty he is still very very far from "catering" to anybody. His basic courtesy, hints of friendship with McGonagall are very far from that, as is his gruff loyalty to DD. Where do we see him "nurturing and cultivating" anybody? It's incongrous to even try and imagine him doing any such thing. Compare him to the way Lockhart does indeed "nurture and cultivate" Hermione - who is clearly a prime candidate for "narcissistic supply." Snape is more lenient with Draco the Slytherins in general, but that doesn't come close the kind of attitude described in this quote. > Pippin suggested the possibility that Snape is more sadistic than > narcissistic. Here is some information which might address that. > From http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php? > artID=166 : > > "A narcissist would tend to display the sadistic aspect of his > personality in one of two cases: > 1. That the very acts of sadism would generate Narcissistic Supply > to be consumed by the narcissist (`I inflict pain, therefore I am > superior') or That's one of the few points that resonate with me in regard of Snape. > > Note the potential reason for behaving sadistically in wanting to > punish students for "intentionally frustrating or withholding" > Narcissistic Supply. Several posters have suggested that Snape > treats Harry & Neville the way he does precisely because he *is* > frustrated by their refusal to take him seriously and to value what > he does. Then why is he also cruel to Hermione? She takes her studies and her professors very seriously - why not "nurture" her? >snip> > > Naama: > > I don't agree with your last speculation. The narcissist > > exploitativeness arises from a deep lack of an authentic response > > to other human beings as specific persons. Think of Lockhart and > > Voldemort. > > Snape, on the other hand, responds to people authentically, > > emotionally (passionately, rather) and specifically - of course, > > he's all twisted and bitter and full of rage - but he doesn't have > > that unique disconnect that (I believe) characterises the > > narcissist. > > SSSusan: > I'm not sure how I feel about the suggestion that Snape responds to > people *authentically.* But as for the issue of exploitation, > narcissists use other people to get what they want without caring > about the cost to the other people. I think this is congruent with > what it would likely take to be a Death Eater. People can be (and generally are) pretty selfish. That doesn't mean they are (necessarily) narcissists. The narcissist exploitativeness arises from deep within, from an unacknowledged lack in his/her sense of self, which is projected as a deficiency in their sense of the autonomous self of others. That's my understanding of what constitutes a narcissist. So, while of course a DE may also be a narcissist, it's by no means necessary. We have to look at Snape and decide whether he has that specific emotional blindness - and I don't think that he does. > From http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php? > artID=85 : > > "The narcissist has no time or energy for anything, except the next > narcissistic fix, NO MATTER WHAT THE PRICE AND WHO IS TRAMPLED UPON." > > SSSusan: > Now, I don't believe that Snape is or was ever *this* bad ? that ALL > he cares about is a narcissistic fix ? but if this describes what is > meant by the interpersonal exploitation characteristic of NPD, it > seems compatible with what Des would be expected to be like. But why do you think that being a DE entailes receiving narcissistic fixes? From the torturing of Muggles? From killing people? I don't think this comes under "interpersonal exploitation", really. It goes beyond that, don't you think? People who get a kick from killing and maiming may have a PD (and may not), but I think the connection to NPD is slim. > Naama: > > I think this is a major point against the narcissistic Snape > > theory. The narcissistic self got "stuck", so to speak, in the > > admiration stage. Snape is healthier than that - his need for > > respect is exaggerated and obviously a result of insecurities, but > > still much closer to normal adult needs than a narcissist. > > > SSSusan: > Again, this is quite possible, Naama. I may have read too much into > this whole thing. Then again, I might not have. ;-) As I said > before, I think once we know why Snape left Voldy, we'll have a > better chance of knowing whether Snape is a fairly healthy, close- to- > normal adult who just doesn't like to have his pride/dignity > assaulted, or whether he more closely fits someone who's > narcissistic. I'm afraid I'm still leaning towards the latter. > Just to be clear - I don't think that Snape is "fairly healthy", either. He is quite a bit f-d up. There's a lot of middle ground between a PD (which is a severe condition) and fairly healthy. His levels of rage, insecurity and cruelty are far (IMO) from healthy or normal. It's just that he is not as damaged as a person with NPD is. Naama From naama_gat at hotmail.com Thu Apr 14 12:05:15 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:05:15 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127529 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: > Possibly, though I would maintain that we really don't know whether > he seeks Draco's flattery or not. When Draco went on about how he > (Snape) should be Headmaster, maybe one reason he did so was because > he's been rewarded for past comments along those lines? Can I just request something here? Can we base this discussion on actual facts and not on speculation? I may possibly have a brain condition - my neurons are wrongly aligned or something, but I find myself incapable of reconciling fact and speculation - like apples and oranges they don't add up. Regarding the current point - we haven't seen Snape reward Draco for flattering remarks, so I'm sticking as close as I can to the realm of facts and assume that he doesn't generaly do it. > > > Re: his interactions with students, there is this from > http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php?artID=86 : > > "Being in a position of authority secures the sources of > Narcissistic Supply [excessive admiration, adulation, attention and > affirmation - or, failing that, wishes to be feared and to be > notorious]. Fed by the awe, fear, subordination, admiration, > adoration and obedience of his underlings ? the narcissist thrives > in such circumstances. > > As far as the narcissist is concerned, there is no moral dimension > to the issue of abusing others ? only a pragmatic one: will he be > punished for doing so?" > > SSSusan: To me, this sounds quite like the typical Snape classroom > behavior. I think it's noteworthy that being feared or being seen > as notorious by underlings is considered an acceptable alternative > to receiving adulation or admiration. I agree of course that Snape creates an atmosphere of fear. What I don't sense from the books is that he *feeds* on this fear. To illustrate what I mean by feed, think of Umbridge - she is someone who feeds on the fear and pain and humiliation she causes others. While Snape is sadistic and takes some sort of pleasure from inflicting (certain kinds of) pain, I don't get the sense that he *needs* others to regard him with fear in order to maintain his sense of self. > >snip> > I totally agree with you that Snape > demands respect from his students. OTOH, I also think he does want > admiration as well -- definitely from DD, likely from his peers, and > possibly a certain degree from his students (think of the "you > should be thanking me on bended knee" comment to Harry). I don't see the last comment as having anything to do with admiration. He thinks Harry should be grateful, i.e., say "thank you", not "oh, you are so wonderful." About DD: we know very little of Snape's relationship with DD, very little of how he feels about him or what he wants from him, emotionally. I certainly can't think of canon supporting the "Snape wants DD to admire him" supposition. What we do know is that Snape is loyal to DD and that DD trusts him. We have very little further insight, I believe, to the deeper aspects of their relationship. > > On this issue of the adults in his environment, something which was > brought up earlier by Mara is that two different people whom one > might class as narcissistic can have different manifestations of > it. Lockhart, for instance, seems to crave admiration from EVERY > witch or wizard he's ever met. Beyond what I've said above about > his interactions with students and how even those could be seen as > satisfying the need for Narcissistic Supply, it may well be that > Snape craves his affirmation and admiration primarily from his > colleagues and especially DD. But there is no evidence as to that. We see so very little interaction between Snape and his colleagues. AFAIR, nothing that we have actually seen even hints that Snape craves admiration/approval from his colleagues. > snip> > The narcissist rates people around him. First, he conducts a binary > test: can this or that person provide him with Narcissistic Supply? > As far as the narcissist is concerned, those who fail this simple > test do not exist. They are two-dimensional cartoon figures. Their > feelings, needs and fears are of no interest or importance." > [Harry??] > > "Those persons who filtered through, are then subjected to a > meticulous examination and probing of the volume and quality of the > Narcissistic Supply that is likely to emanate from them. The > narcissist nurtures and cultivates these people. He caters to their > needs, desires, and wishes. He considers their emotions. He > encourages those aspects of their personality that are likely to > enhance their ability to provide him with his much needed supply. In > this very restricted sense, he regards and treats them as `human'. > This is his way of `maintaining and servicing' his Supply Sources." > > SSSusan: > McGonagall, Dumbledore and other staff members?? The description is > a little stronger than what we see with Snape, perhaps, but we also > don't see what happens in the staff room, yet what we *do* see of > the interactions between Snape & McG and many between Snape & DD > could support it. As I see it, the quote you brought actually supports my position. Snape doesn't "cater" to anybody's "needs, desires and wishes." I feel very strongly that he doesn't regard people with that "binary division" - those who can "feed" his narsissistic need and those that can't. He is generally nasty to people - that's his normal mode. His nastiness varies in intensity, true, but at his least nasty he is still very very far from "catering" to anybody's "needs, desires and wishes." His basic courtesy, hints of friendship with McGonagall are so very far from that, as is his gruff loyalty to DD. Where do we see him "nurturing and cultivating" anybody? It's incongrous to even try and imagine him doing any such thing. Compare him to the way Lockhart does indeed "nurture and cultivate" Hermione - who is clearly a prime candidate for "narcissistic supply." Snape is more lenient with Draco the Slytherins in general, but surely that doesn't come close the kind of attitude described in this quote. > > Pippin suggested the possibility that Snape is more sadistic than > narcissistic. Here is some information which might address that. > From http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php? > artID=166 : > > "A narcissist would tend to display the sadistic aspect of his > personality in one of two cases: > 1. That the very acts of sadism would generate Narcissistic Supply > to be consumed by the narcissist (`I inflict pain, therefore I am > superior') or That's one of the few points that resonate with me in regard of Snape. > > Note the potential reason for behaving sadistically in wanting to > punish students for "intentionally frustrating or withholding" > Narcissistic Supply. Several posters have suggested that Snape > treats Harry & Neville the way he does precisely because he *is* > frustrated by their refusal to take him seriously and to value what > he does. Then why is he also cruel to Hermione? She takes her studies and her professors very seriously - why not "nurture" her? >snip> > > Naama: > > I don't agree with your last speculation. The narcissist > > exploitativeness arises from a deep lack of an authentic response > > to other human beings as specific persons. Think of Lockhart and > > Voldemort. > > Snape, on the other hand, responds to people authentically, > > emotionally (passionately, rather) and specifically - of course, > > he's all twisted and bitter and full of rage - but he doesn't have > > that unique disconnect that (I believe) characterises the > > narcissist. > > SSSusan: > I'm not sure how I feel about the suggestion that Snape responds to > people *authentically.* But as for the issue of exploitation, > narcissists use other people to get what they want without caring > about the cost to the other people. I think this is congruent with > what it would likely take to be a Death Eater. People can be (and generally are) pretty selfish. That doesn't mean they are (necessarily) narcissists. The narcissist exploitativeness arises from deep within, from an unacknowledged lack in his/her sense of self, which is projected as a deficiency in their sense of the autonomous self of others. That's my understanding of what constitutes a narcissist. So, while of course a DE may also be a narcissist, it's by no means necessary. We have to look at Snape and decide whether he has that specific emotional blindness - and I don't think that he does. > > From http://www.mental-health-matters.com/articles/sv001.php? > artID=85 : > > "The narcissist has no time or energy for anything, except the next > narcissistic fix, NO MATTER WHAT THE PRICE AND WHO IS TRAMPLED UPON." > > SSSusan: > Now, I don't believe that Snape is or was ever *this* bad ? that ALL > he cares about is a narcissistic fix ? but if this describes what is > meant by the interpersonal exploitation characteristic of NPD, it > seems compatible with what Des would be expected to be like. But why do you think that being a DE entailes receiving narcissistic fixes? From the torturing of Muggles? From killing people? I don't think this comes under "interpersonal exploitation", really. It goes beyond that, don't you think? People who get a kick from killing and maiming may have PD (and may not), but I think the connection to NPD is slim. > > Naama: > > I think this is a major point against the narcissistic Snape > > theory. The narcissistic self got "stuck", so to speak, in the > > admiration stage. Snape is healthier than that - his need for > > respect is exaggerated and obviously a result of insecurities, but > > still much closer to normal adult needs than a narcissist. > > > SSSusan: > Again, this is quite possible, Naama. I may have read too much into > this whole thing. Then again, I might not have. ;-) As I said > before, I think once we know why Snape left Voldy, we'll have a > better chance of knowing whether Snape is a fairly healthy, close- to- > normal adult who just doesn't like to have his pride/dignity > assaulted, or whether he more closely fits someone who's > narcissistic. I'm afraid I'm still leaning towards the latter. > Just to be clear - I don't think that Snape is "fairly healthy", either. He is quite a bit f-d up. There's a lot of middle ground between a PD (which is a severe condition) and fairly healthy. His levels of rage, insecurity and cruelty are far (IMO) from healthy or normal. It's just that he is not as damaged as a person with NPD is. Naama > > The only incident with similar circumstances which comes to my mind > and I am not sure whether you were talking about this one is when > Ron and Harry arrive to school in CoS and rush to Sorting. > > "Hang on... Harry muttered to Ron. "There;s an emty chair at the > staff table... Where's Snape?" > ... > "Maybe he's ill" said Ron hopefully. > "Maybe he's left," said Harry, "because he missed out on the Defense > Against Dark Arts job again!" > "Or he migh have been sacked!" said Ron enthusiastically. "I mean > everyone hates him--" > "Or maybe ," said a very cold voice right behind them, "he's waiting > to hear why you two didn't arrive on the school train." - CoS, p.78, > paperback. > > If this is the one you are referring to, I see no sign of amusement > in Snape's voice, although remark by itself is entertaining to me, > sure. > > But judging by the way Snape deals with it later on, I would say he > does care about what he overheard ( IMO only), because he does not > really bother like Dumbledore to figure out whay it happened. I > mean, sure it WAS dangerous, but I wonder how remarks like this one > is going to help to investigate what happened. > > "So", he said softly, "the train isn't good enough for the famous > Harry Potter and his faithful sidekick Weasley. Wanted toa rrive > with a bang, did we, boys?" - CoS, p.78. > > I think ( and this IS a speculation of course) that Snape IS annoyed > with boys badmouthing him earlier and now does the same "mature" > thing to them. JMO, of course. Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but ... where's the difference in his reaction here and any of his regular snide remarks to Harry (which don't have the context of having just overheared Harry talking about him)? He is mean, nasty - but nothing out of the usual. However, there are situations where his reactions are different - you sense an explosion within him. Now, certain things set the trigger and other things don't. Here - no explosion; therefore, being bad-mouthed isn't the sort of thing that he is particularly sensitive to. OTOH, when Harry cheeks him in class (therby undermining his authority, showing disrespect) - he reacts with real anger. Naama From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 12:54:42 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:54:42 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127530 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Constance Vigilance" wrote: > The Veil. I think it is the biggest unresolved artifact in the series > thus far. I would not be surprised to see Harry go through the veil, > but my money would be in Book 7. Me: Book 6, Book 7...what's a tome between friends? Now, if I were a guessing man--and modern medical science has clearly proven I am not- -my wild GUESS would be at the end of Book 6. But that's a trifle. As I was re-rummaging through the various books, looking for hidden (or as-yet-unnoticed-by-me) snippets*, I found the following tidbit of interest to this hypothesis: At Nearly Headless Nick's Deathday Party, Nick pulls back a black veil and allows Harry to pass into-- in a way--a land of the dead. > Since "going through the veil" seems to imply a permanent death, what > would happen if a ghost went through the veil? I think that it is > highly likely that we will see Nearly Headless Nick going through the > veil in a future book, as he seems somewhat regretful that he didn't > have the courage the first time to finish his death. His rejected > application to the Headless Hunt might cause him to realize that he > is a misfit as a ghost, and given a properly heroic reason, he could > easily be convinced to Cross Over. Me: See above. As I ruminate this further, I think it very possible that Nick might be able to "pull back" this OTHER (and more serious) veil for Harry to pass through. Also, the implication of the underworld being a land of no return is what makes it such a fascinating thing. However, classic mythology has some notable exceptions...not just the usual heroes, but also guys like Aesclepius whose curative skills were so great he was able to spring people out..to Hades' great annoyance. > ConstanceVigilance: > > I didn't notice that during my readings. But it is a good catch, JM. > As I recall Persephone was not supposed to eat anything but she ate 6 > pomegranate pips. Her punishment was to spend one month in Hades for > each pip. The world dies with her for those 6 months, giving us > winter. So, Persephone + pomegranates = partial bad news. Perhaps > Harry + pomegranate = Not Completely Bad News, too? Maybe he will be > able to "die" and come back? OK, I'm reaching. I don't want Harry to > die, but I think we are given many hints that it is coming. Me, yet again: I think you may be righter than you know. If one wants to, one could overlay the template of Classical Epic to the arc of the Harry Potter books. One of the recurring themes in these sorts of books (Like The Aeneid, The Odyssey, etc.) is what some call "Descent Motif" wherein our hero (Aeneas, Herakles/Hercules, Odysseus, etc.) goes down to the underworld (technically dying, I s'pose) and retrieves--or attempts to--something of value. These books also usually feature a mentor whom the hero must transcend, and this could be the case with Harry and Sirius. Again, my guess, is Harry will cross the veil--technically dying--to fetch Sirius, will meet up with Sirius and will come back without him...but will come back with something--I have no idea what--else, of inestimable value to an eventual victory. After all, if crossing the veil was no big deal, then classic epics wouldn't make such a fuss about it...right? More later. -Joe in SoFla * My way of "sleuthing" the HP books is pretty simplistic--as I am but a Watson swimming in a sea of Sherlocks and the odd Mycroft--I read the books the first time to enjoy them, but the second and third times I look for patterns, running bits, threads...THEN when I re-re-read them, I look for evidence or details that refer (supporting or refuting) to the thread and the hypothesis formed around it. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 14 13:27:33 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:27:33 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127531 Naama earlier: > > > I also agree that while pleased with Draco's flattery, > > > he doesn't seek it. SSSusan responded: > > Possibly, though I would maintain that we really don't know > > whether he seeks Draco's flattery or not. When Draco went on > > about how he (Snape) should be Headmaster, maybe one reason he > > did so was because he's been rewarded for past comments along > > those lines? Naama then said: > Can I just request something here? Can we base this discussion on > actual facts and not on speculation? I may possibly have a brain > condition - my neurons are wrongly aligned or something, but I find > myself incapable of reconciling fact and speculation - like apples > and oranges they don't add up. > Regarding the current point - we haven't seen Snape reward Draco > for flattering remarks, so I'm sticking as close as I can to the > realm of facts and assume that he doesn't generaly do so. SSSusan: Well, I have three thoughts in response to this request: 1) if a list member isn't fond of another poster's style, there is nothing which requires the person to respond; 2) this entire thread is necessarily quite speculative; and most important for the purposes of discussion, 3) I brought up a scene, from canon, where we SEE Draco flattering Snape. Now, I think Naama is saying that this is just a student flattering a teacher and the teacher seems to be pleased. End stop. That's fine. What I see is a kid who is speaking up freely in *Snape's* class and saying flattering things to *Snape.* From what I remember, we rarely see EITHER thing, so when it happens, I think it's worth speculating about. Why is it that Draco feels comfortable speaking up in Snape's class? Why is it that Draco doesn't seem to hesitate in schmoozing & flattering Snape, openly stating he believes he'd be a wonderful headmaster? These kinds of questions may seem off limits, in the sense that we don't have canon answers for them, but they speak to a scene in canon, and I guess my tendency is to believe that wondering about them, speculating if you will, is fine & dandy and might prove fruitful. Is it really that big a stretch to say that perhaps Draco is quite comfortably openly flattering Snape in class because he has flattered Snape before and received Snape's approval [or at least not Snape's wrath] for it? Naama: > I agree of course that Snape creates an atmosphere of fear. What I > don't sense from the books is that he *feeds* on this fear. To > illustrate what I mean by feed, think of Umbridge - she is someone > who feeds on the fear and pain and humiliation she causes others. > While Snape is sadistic and takes some sort of pleasure from > inflicting (certain kinds of) pain, I don't get the sense that he > *needs* others to regard him with fear in order to maintain his > sense of self. SSSusan: Again, you may be right; I may be wrong. I merely present the possibility and say that I find it interesting. Naama: > About DD: we know very little of Snape's relationship with DD, very > little of how he feels about him or what he wants from him, > emotionally. I certainly can't think of canon supporting the "Snape > wants DD to admire him" supposition. What we do know is that Snape > is loyal to DD and that DD trusts him. We have very little further > insight, I believe, to the deeper aspects of their relationship. > > We see so very little interaction between Snape and his colleagues. > AFAIR, nothing that we have actually seen even hints that Snape > craves admiration/approval from his colleagues. He's kind of > perpetually snide to everybody - with some fluctutation, but not > much. SSSusan: You're right that we necessarily have very little insight into anything about what Snape wants emotionally from DD. As I noted above, this entire thread is highly speculative. Yet I *so* see Snape craving DD's, if not admiration, at least his validation of his importance in the "You have not forgotten that he tried to kill ME?" [emphasis *not* mine] remark. But that's just my reading. And I would argue that we see Snape willing to back down from DD & from McGonagall. When DD tells Snape the punishment for the Flying Ford Anglia isn't HIS to give, but MM's, he ascedes. When DD says, "Innocent until proven guilty, Severus," Snape backs off. MM talks about the Quidditch Cup and "hearing about it" from Snape in a way which made me as a reader believe it was in the nature of collegial ribbing. In none of these instances -- and these are just off the top of my head -- do I see Snape as snide. He is snide with Lupin & with Fake! Moody (both DADA teachers, natch, and people he has reason to feel negative towards or uneasy around), but do we see him being snide with Sprout, Pomfrey, Flitwick? I don't recall it. Naama: > He is generally nasty to people - that's his normal mode. His > nastiness varies in intensity, true, but at his least nasty he is > still very very far from "catering" to anybody. His basic courtesy, > hints of friendship with McGonagall are very far from that, as is > his gruff loyalty to DD. SSSusan: Again, you see it this way; I see it another. I see Snape as almost conciliatory with DD. Naama: > Then why is he also cruel to Hermione? She takes her studies and > her professors very seriously - why not "nurture" her? SSSusan: I addressed this upthread. Whereas Snape appears to view most students as dunderheads, clearly Hermione is no dunderhead. In fact, her hand-always-in-the-air know-it-allness may be seen as a challenge ["See what *I* know!"]. Yes, it means believing he is seeing or treating different students differently, but Snape's got a history of that, no? Naama: > People can be (and generally are) pretty selfish. That doesn't mean > they are (necessarily) narcissists. The narcissist exploitativeness > arises from deep within, from an unacknowledged lack in his/her > sense of self, which is projected as a deficiency in their sense of > the autonomous self of others. That's my understanding of what > constitutes a narcissist. So, while of course a DE may also be a > narcissist, it's by no means necessary. We have to look at Snape > and decide whether he has that specific emotional blindness - and I > don't think that he does. SSSusan: I agree with this description, but I think that Snape does have that specific emotional blindness. So there we differ. And that's part of the game and the fun of it all, imo. Naama: > Just to be clear - I don't think that Snape is "fairly healthy", > either. He is quite a bit f-d up. There's a lot of middle ground > between a PD (which is a severe condition) and fairly healthy. His > levels of rage, insecurity and cruelty are far (IMO) from healthy > or normal. It's just that he is not as damaged as a person with NPD > is. SSSusan: Yup, there is a lot of middle ground between those extremes, just as there are ranges of impairment with NPD. This is why I've also stated that I'm tending to come down as potentially finding *narcissistic traits* over full-blown NPD. But I do still see the narcissistic traits. Siriusly Snapey Susan From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 13:58:25 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 06:58:25 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Character Psych Profiles - Umbridge = Insecure! In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050414135825.47969.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127532 --- Jim Ferer wrote: > I believe it's the insecurity you speak of that leads people like > Umbridge to become toadies and sycophants. People with a stronger > sense of self wouldn't be as likely to hitch their wagons to > someone like Fudge the way she has. They certainly wouldn't have > to affirm themselves by her cruelty. Umbridge is not insecure, she's quite a strong person. In fact, I think the character I think she resembles most closely is Lucius Malfoy. Both contemptuous of "inferior" beings and those less intelligent and determined than they are (but rarely pausing to wonder if someone might have other strengths to consider), both seeing no other way of winning an encounter than by totally putting down an opponent, both with a taste for sadism and pain, and both enjoying manipulating that pathetic waste of oxygen known as Cornelius Fudge. Between them, Umbridge and Malfoy are running the MoM the way they want it run and letting Fudge handle the tedious public duties (speeches, presentations, public appearances) that Fudge so enjoys and which they know are irrelevant compared to wielding real power. Umbridge makes a tactical error by becoming the virtual dictator of Hogwarts because she really doesn't know how to work a situation where she's out front rather than manipulating a figurehead like Fudge. She overreaches herself and falls rather badly. And one trusts, permanently. I doubt if she'll be back in the series. She's blown her cover with Fudge (she couldn't even deliver Marietta's testimony) who'll be gone soon anyway, and Lucius has his own problems these days. Nope, Delores is adios. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Thu Apr 14 14:12:50 2005 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:12:50 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127533 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: Oh, I'm afraid I'm fired up & ready to go again! ;-) Demetra - finding herself unable to resist joining the fray! I have no credentials besides a minor in psychology and a (thankfully) brief clinical stint on an inpatient adolescent unit in a Psych hospital. SSSusan ? I'm thinking that you are in the right forest, but perhaps barking up the wrong tree. I'm a confessed Snape-phile, but I'm not blind to his "issues". I would agree that Snape seems to exhibit aspects of a Personality Disorder, I just don't think it's NPD ? for a few reasons. One reason I resist the NPD label for Snape is tied to the colloquial understanding of the term Narcissist. The term originates in Greek Mythology and JKR has consistently weaved aspects of traditional Greek and Roman Mythology into the books (the three headed dog, etc). Thus, it is hard for me to imagine that JKR would consciously base any character as NPD precisely because the criteria you have listed does not appear to be consistent with the mythology. In the myth, Narcissus is painted as quite superficial and vain, falling in love with his own reflection. Thus she chose Mrs. Malfoy to be named "Narcissa". Plus, if I'm not mistaken, the UK uses ICD-10 criteria for psychiatric diagnoses, not DSM criteria that are used here in the states. When I tried to look up ICD-10 criteria for NPD, I was only able to find this: The ICD-10 does not specifically define the characteristics of this personality disorder, it is classified in the category "Other Specific Personality Disorders". ICD-10 states NPD is a personality disorder that fits none of the specific rubrics F60.0 ? F60.7 Clearly much more vague than the DSM criteria, IMHO. On the other hand, when I reviewed F60.0 ? F60.7 I saw other personality disorders that I think Snape more closely fits. Of course the difficulty is that we don't have enough information to really know the why's of Snape's behavior. Why is he a loner ? is it that he thinks nobody likes him or does he think everyone else is beneath him or is he afraid he will slip up and reveal his spy status? It makes it extremely difficult to classify him without this info. That being said, it is still fun, so I'll take a stab at it! Here is the ICD-10 criteria for Anankastic (Obsessive-Compulsive) Personality Disorder Personality disorder characterized by at least 3 of the following: a. feelings of excessive doubt and caution; b. preoccupation with details, rules, lists, order, organization or schedule; c. perfectionism that interferes with task completion; d. excessive conscientiousness, scrupulousness, and undue preoccupation with productivity to the exclusion of pleasure and interpersonal relationships; e. excessive pedantry and adherence to social conventions; f. rigidity and stubbornness; g. unreasonable insistence by the patient that others submit to exactly his or her way of doing things, or unreasonable reluctance to allow others to do things; h. intrusion of insistent and unwelcome thoughts or impulses. I'll put Sevvie down for meeting b, f and g. Possibly d and e. Here's another one -Schizoid Personality Disorder Personality disorder characterized by at least 3 of the following: i. few, if any, activities, provide pleasure; j. emotional coldness, detachment or flattened affectivity; k. limited capacity to express either warm, tender feelings or anger towards others; l. apparent indifference to either praise or criticism; m. little interest in having sexual experiences with another person (taking into account age); n. almost invariable preference for solitary activities; o. excessive preoccupation with fantasy and introspection; p. lack of close friends or confiding relationships (or having only one) and of desire for such relationships; q. marked insensitivity to prevailing social norms and conventions. I'll put Sevvie down for meeting j, n, p, q. Possibly I, L. M ? nope, ain't gonna go there. And finally, my personal favorite - Paranoid Personality Disorder Personality disorder characterized by at least 3 of the following: r. excessive sensitiveness to setbacks and rebuffs; s. tendency to bear grudges persistently, i.e. refusal to forgive insults and injuries or slights; t. suspiciousness and a pervasive tendency to distort experience by misconstruing the neutral or friendly actions of others as hostile or contemptuous; u. a combative and tenacious sense of personal rights out of keeping with the actual situation; v. recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding sexual fidelity of spouse or sexual partner; w. tendency to experience excessive self-importance, manifest in a persistent self-referential attitude; x. preoccupation with unsubstantiated "conspiratorial" explanations of events both immediate to the patient and in the world at large. I think Snape meets r, s and w. Possibles include t, u and x. Wonder if Kneasy ever addressed V in his Aggie theory? For those who've stayed with me this long, let's play a game. This next one reminded me of another character (not Snape). Which character do you think this best describes? Histrionic Personality Disorder Personality disorder characterized by at least 3 of the following: y. self-dramatization, theatricality, exaggerated expression of emotions; z. suggestibility, easily influenced by others or by circumstances; aa. shallow and labile affectivity; bb. continual seeking for excitement, appreciation by others, and activities in which the patient is the center of attention; cc. inappropriate seductiveness in appearance or behavior; dd. over-concern with physical attractiveness. Associated features may include egocentricity, self-indulgence, continuous longing for appreciation, feelings that are easily hurt, and persistent manipulative behavior to achieve own needs. Demetra, who will go on record saying the character she would peg as NPD is Draco Malfoy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 14 14:42:16 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 14:42:16 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127534 > Demetra - finding herself unable to resist joining the fray! > SSSusan ? I'm thinking that you are in the right forest, but > perhaps barking up the wrong tree. SSSusan: Arf, arf!!! I may be. ;-) Demetra: > One reason I resist the NPD label for Snape is tied to the > colloquial understanding of the term Narcissist. Thus, it is hard > for me to imagine that JKR would consciously base any character as > NPD precisely because the criteria you have listed does not appear > to be consistent with the mythology. SSSusan: This is a good point, especially if one considers the possibility that JKR targets her books to kids. It also speaks to Pippin's objection that she can't picture JKR w/ one hand writing Snape and the other hand holding open an abnormal psych textbook. Lockhart, of course, would fulfill the colloquial understanding of Narcissist much better. Or, as you suggest, we may find out there's a reason for the name Narcissa beyond JKR's penchant for utilizing flower/plant names for characters. Demetra: > Here's another one -Schizoid Personality Disorder > m. little interest in having sexual experiences with another person > (taking into account age); > o. excessive preoccupation with fantasy and introspection; > I'll put Sevvie down for meeting j, n, p, q. Possibly I, L. > M ? nope, ain't gonna go there. SSSusan: And there's no way I'd go with "o" unless backstory forces me to (i.e., the reason why Snape left Voldy). Demetra: > And finally, my personal favorite - Paranoid Personality Disorder SSSusan: You make a good case for this one. Demetra: > Which character do you think this best describes? > > Histrionic Personality Disorder > Personality disorder characterized by at least 3 of the following: > y. self-dramatization, theatricality, exaggerated expression of > emotions; > z. suggestibility, easily influenced by others or by circumstances; > aa. shallow and labile affectivity; > bb. continual seeking for excitement, appreciation by others, and > activities in which the patient is the center of attention; > cc. inappropriate seductiveness in appearance or behavior; > dd. over-concern with physical attractiveness. > Associated features may include egocentricity, self-indulgence, > continuous longing for appreciation, feelings that are easily hurt, > and persistent manipulative behavior to achieve own needs. SSSusan: I'm assuming you're going for Lockhart? But I'd wonder about z., if that's who you meant. Siriusly Snapey Susan, still finding this fun :-) From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Apr 14 16:03:32 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:03:32 -0000 Subject: Occlumency, Narcissistic!Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127535 In all of the traumatic memories dredged up by the Occlumency lessons, there's one figure we never see -- Severus Snape! I couldn't believe this when I realized it, and I had to recheck the canon to make sure, but this is blowing me away! It has got to be significant, but how?? Possible answers: * The legilimens can't probe any memories regarding himself personally * Harry's memories of Snape aren't that traumatic * Harry's a much better occlumens than he thinks, and is able to unconsciously block memories of Snape * Snape is deliberately avoiding those memories. That would really blow Narcissistic!Snape out of the water, wouldn't it? Could a Narcissist really consistently avoid reliving his moments of triumph? Thoughts? Pippin From cat_kind at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 16:06:33 2005 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:06:33 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127536 Geoff: > The fact is that men and women often process facts and events in a > different way, practically, emotionally and intellectually. It > doesn't imply any difference in status or intelligence, it is because > males and females /do/ see things in a different light. catkind: I find this a huge and dangerous overgeneralisation. *Different people* process facts and events in a different way. If you look at the distribution of behaviours of women, and compare it with the distribution of behaviours of men, the two will be different: the "average" woman might see things in a different light from the "average" man, if those terms mean anything at all. To some extent this has to do with biological differences; in my opinion it is more to do with cultural differences. But there is a huge overlap. The average tells you nothing about how to approach individual people. /Any/ two people will see things in a different light. There's no way you can tell from their different lights which gender they belong to. It's like saying men are taller than women, or men are stronger than women. Some are, some aren't. True on average, but rather silly if you take it as an absolute. Fred is taller than Mary because Fred happens to be taller than Mary, not because he's a man. I expect people like Geoff do mean these statements statistically, but I strongly feel that this sort of blunt statement is dangerous. This is precisely the sort of place where sexism can creep in to our thinking. Oh bother, and I really didn't want to get involved in this discussion. catkind From eggplant9998 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 16:42:20 2005 From: eggplant9998 at yahoo.com (eggplant9998) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:42:20 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127537 Somebody asked Rowling about this, they said: "People love Ron, for example. Kids think you're going to knock off Ron because he's the best friend." Rowling responded: "Kids do, because they're sharp and they've seen so many films where the hero's best friend gets it. So they think I'm going to make it personal by killing Ron. But maybe that's a double bluff It's not that I sat down with a list and decided to write, "you're going, you're going, you're going." There are reasons for the deaths in each case, in terms of the story. So that's why I'm doing it." She seems to be saying killing the best friend would be a clich?, however I do think important people will die, Dumbledore in book 6 and Voldemort and Harry in book 7. Eggplant From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Apr 14 16:50:27 2005 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:50:27 -0000 Subject: Occlumency, Narcissistic!Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127538 Pippin: > Possible answers [why we don't see Harry's memories of Snape in Occlumency]: > * The legilimens can't probe any memories regarding himself > personally > > * Harry's memories of Snape aren't that traumatic > > * Harry's a much better occlumens than he thinks, and is able > to unconsciously block memories of Snape > > * Snape is deliberately avoiding those memories. That would really > blow Narcissistic!Snape out of the water, wouldn't it? Could a > Narcissist really consistently avoid reliving his moments of triumph? Jen: Good catch, Pippin! I wanted to add a possibility to the list. All of the memories Snape elicits from Harry have very vulnerable feelings attached to them: Fear of the dementors, Ripper the dog & being sorted into Slytherin; shock and grief over Cedric's death; jealousy of Dudley's bike; ambivalent feelings toward Cho. The rage Harry feels almost constantly toward Snape may not be the kind of thing a Legilimens is skilled at retrieving. Like the Dementors not being able to suck Sirius dry because he held onto his obsession, perhaps a Legilimens cannot access memories attached to a powerful feeling like rage. Or, they may be *harder* to access and those vulnerable memories are easier to get at. In that case, Harry could be a better Occlumens than Snape gives him credit for, like you said. Jen From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 14 17:05:43 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:05:43 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Occlumency, Narcissistic!Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127539 Jen Reese suggested: >The rage Harry feels almost constantly toward Snape may not be the >kind of thing a Legilimens is skilled at retrieving. Like the >Dementors not being able to suck Sirius dry because he held onto his >obsession, perhaps a Legilimens cannot access memories attached to a >powerful feeling like rage. > >Or, they may be *harder* to access and those vulnerable memories are >easier to get at. In that case, Harry could be a better Occlumens than >Snape gives him credit for, like you said. Furthermore, this could be the answer to the question "How is Snape able to continue as a double agent when most of the WW knows he's ostensibly working for Dumbledore?" Perhaps even if Voldemort is a Legilimens, Snape's smoke screen of rage and hatred -- two things Voldemort wouldn't care about or be surprised by -- are keeping him from learning the truth. Janet Anderson From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 10:15:57 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 03:15:57 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050414101557.35608.qmail@web30711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127540 DD wrote: > THERE IS a reason why Snape is horrible to BOTH > Neville AND Harry..and > JK has pretty much explained why Snape dislikes > Harry..but she has > never explained why Snape dislikes Neville so much! This has also piqued my curiosity as well. Other than the fact Neville is lousy at potions I have always wondered why he (Neville) is number two on Snape's hit list. Laurie From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 12:29:05 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:29:05 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127541 mallrat42g wrote: > I have been saying this for years and years. Ron is going to die. > I think that Ron's death is the only thing that can motivate Harry > enough to kill Voldemort. > Ron is all he has, and to loose Ron will be the thing that > sends Harry over the edge. I hope you're wrong, both because I like the charcter, and because I don't think that the "Power the Dark Lord knows not" is vengeance. I think Riddle knows that power well. Amiable Dorsai From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 16:36:47 2005 From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Crowe) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 12:36:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <425E9C1F.8050601@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127542 mallrat42g wrote: > I have been saying this for years and years. Ron is going to die. Hi, I'm Gardengirl, and I'm new here. But I have to respectfully disagree on this one. It's just not consistent with the conventions JKR employs in her stories. In the fabulous bit from the New Yorker in 2000, JKR's use of classical myth, storytelling, conventions and the like, are well argued. And nowhere in that does Killing Off the Loyal Friend appear. Just MHO. Gardengirl From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 13:33:07 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 13:33:07 -0000 Subject: Who cast the Fidelius on James and Lily? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127543 I've long been under the impression that Dumbledore cast the Fidelius Charm that was supposed to hide the Potters at Godric's Hollow, but I can't find any reference to that after a quick perusal of PoA. I ask because it seems odd to me that if Dumbledore cast the spell, he wouldn't know who the Secret Keeper was. (Although, I suppose that knowledge of who the SK is could be one of the things hidden by the charm). Amiable Dorsai From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 17:21:24 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:21:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050414172125.72749.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127544 --- laurie goudge wrote: > This has also piqued my curiosity as well. Other than > the fact Neville is lousy at potions I have always > wondered why he (Neville) is number two on Snape's hit > list. Because the kid is hell on the cauldron replacement section of the overall Potions department budget. Galleons add up, you know. Partly it's a plot device to create a basis of comparison between Neville and Harry so that readers can contrast the way the two handle the situation as the series goes along. It's a way of establishing Neville's character as we see him nervous and unsure in Potions, and yet so often being brave outside of the classroom. I really don't think Snape has a Frank-Longbottom problem like he has a James-Potter one. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 14 17:46:27 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 17:46:27 -0000 Subject: Draco: King Maker was Re: Back to narcissistic!Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127545 > Naama: I also agree that while pleased with Draco's flattery, > > he doesn't seek it. > > SSSusan: > Possibly, though I would maintain that we really don't know whether > he seeks Draco's flattery or not. When Draco went on about how he > (Snape) should be Headmaster, maybe one reason he did so was because > he's been rewarded for past comments along those lines? > > Potioncat: But look what Draco was doing. He was offering to use his influence for Snape. Can't you just see it now, 6th year Draco saunters in to the Headmaster's office, "See here, Snape. I put you in this job, I can kick you out. Either make those changes I told you about or else!" If anything, Draco was acting like Umbridge Junior and Snape knew exactly what was going on. He managed to accept the praise(?) and dismiss it at the same time. From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 18:10:02 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:10:02 -0000 Subject: Back to narcissistic!Snape (was: Lucious, Severus, and Narcissistic PD) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127546 > > Demetra, who will go on record saying the character she would peg as > NPD is Draco Malfoy We technically could not peg Draco as NPD because he is not yet 18, but he certianly is following after daddy's footsteps thus far. From jferer at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 18:43:20 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:43:20 -0000 Subject: Character Psych Profiles - Umbridge = Insecure! In-Reply-To: <20050414135825.47969.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127547 Magda: " Umbridge is not insecure, she's quite a strong person. In fact, I think the character I think she resembles most closely is Lucius Malfoy. Both contemptuous of "inferior" beings and those less intelligent and determined than they are (but rarely pausing to wonder if someone might have other strengths to consider)" Umbridge has made herself a tool of the Ministry, while Lucius Malfoy is manipulating the Ministry. They share an amorality in the service of what they see as their interests, but the difference is that Umbridge seems to have adopted protection of the Ministry and Fudge, while Lucius uses the Ministry and Fudge for his own ends. Lucius is much more sure of himself than Umbridge is; a lot of it comes from having money. Lucius seems to be subservient to Voldemort, but I'd be surprised if he sees it that way. It's convenient, necessary, to fulfill his ends. Umbridge would like to be some kind of Stalinist commissar; Lucius wants to be Stalin. It wouldn't surprise me to see Lucius taking a more independent tack from Voldemort; he can't be happy at Voldemort's recent blunders, the latest one of which landed him in the Crossbar Hotel. Jim Ferer From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 19:24:51 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:24:51 -0000 Subject: Neville is The One In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127548 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "doddiemoemoe" wrote: > > > There is only one thing I feel certain of in my mind.. > > THERE IS a reason why snape is horrible to BOTH Neville AND Harry..and JK has pretty much explained why Snape dislikes Harry..but she has never explained why Snape dislikes Neville so much! Tonks now: I have a theory, give here before, about why Snape is hard on both boys. Snape is given the job as Potions Master and not as DADA master because it is part of his punishment for his DE deeds. And he is not doing research, he is teaching. And as a teacher he is teaching the children of the parents that were either dead or maimed as a result of LV and the DE. Seeing Harry and Neville is a daily reminder to him of what he took part in as a DE. It does not matter if he was personally responsible for the death of the Potters or the tortured of the Longbottoms. Because he was a part of the group and did nothing to stand up and say "no" he is as guilty as the rest. And he does not like to be reminded of this day after day. He does not like to see the orphans that are a result of his time as a DE. Having said all of that, I think there is some reason for Neville. I mean JKR would not have a *spare* just for the heck of it. Neville has some purpose, I just don't know what yet. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 19:34:53 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:34:53 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127549 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mallrat42g" wrote: > > I think that Ron's death is the only thing that can motivate Harry > enough to kill Voldemort. Sirius' death greatly effected Harry, but belatrix killed Sirius, not Voldemort. The death of Sirius gave > enough hate and rage to Harry to want to use an Unforgiveable Curse on a perseon. Sirius was the only person Harry trusted as family. The only person he has now is Ron. > > Ron's death will be the key in Harry's killing of Voldemort. It is > the only way. Ron is the only family Harry has ever truly known. Tonks now: There are worst things than death. And being betrayed by a friend is one of them. I am of the Judas/Ron cult. I don't think that Ron will die. I think that Harry will die because of something that Ron does to betray him. Ron will not do it to hurt Harry, he will be doing it for some reason that he *thinks* will help. But it will be a betray and Harry will also see it that way and will be deeply hurt by it. Also Harry must not kill LV. Harry must not put himself on LV's level. He must be above that. There is only one thing that I am 100% certain of in this series and that is that Harry will never kill anyone. If he does, I will put the books on the shelve and never open them again. Tonks_op From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 20:14:27 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:14:27 -0000 Subject: Neville is The One In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127550 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tim Regan" wrote: > Some of you will know why I put `revelations' in quotes. I was > really really disappointed by the prophesy. To me it seemed to tell > none of the main stakeholders (Dumbledore, Harry, Voldemort, or the > reader) anything much new. GEO: Actually it did bring up something knew, which was that Harry had the power that the dark lord knows not that I think both the Dark Lord and us the audience and readers seem to both ignore and underestimate. Afterall it was the same power that deprived Voldemort of his body in 81 and also helped him in his rebirthing ceremony in GoF to become greater than ever. > So he narrows the list down to two suspects, Harry and Neville, and > goes after the *least* likely (the half-blood) just to confirm his > hunch that The One is Neville. Meanwhile his henchmen/women go after > Neville's family to prepare the ground. GEO: His minions (Lestranges, Crouch Jr.) went after the Longbottoms after his fall and according to JKR on the orders of someone else possibly dear Lucius so Harry was indeed the Dark Lord's first choice as potential threat despite the fact that Harry was just a half-blood and initially had few resemblances to Harry. > But Voldemort and Dumbledore missed one fact. In Godric's Hollow an > Avada Kedavra went from the baby Harry onto Voldemort. What > happened? It failed. Why? Harry is not The One. If he was, Voldemort > would be dead. Hence Neville is The One. GEO: Again it points to something that Voldemort did between the time he left Hogwarts and the Halloween of 81 where he fell not to the fact that Neville not Harry is the one. If Neville were to AK him, he would probably still be rendered incorporeal though still alive, which might dovetail to the second question of why Dumbledore never tries to kill Voldemort since the destruction of his physical body would still leave his spirit alive. From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 20:21:16 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:21:16 -0000 Subject: Occlumency, Narcissistic!Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127551 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Janet Anderson" wrote: > Jen Reese suggested: > > >The rage Harry feels almost constantly toward Snape may not be the > >kind of thing a Legilimens is skilled at retrieving. Like the > >Dementors not being able to suck Sirius dry because he held onto his > >obsession, perhaps a Legilimens cannot access memories attached to a > >powerful feeling like rage. > > > >Or, they may be *harder* to access and those vulnerable memories are > >easier to get at. In that case, Harry could be a better Occlumens than > >Snape gives him credit for, like you said. > > Furthermore, this could be the answer to the question "How is Snape able to > continue as a double agent when most of the WW knows he's ostensibly working > for Dumbledore?" Perhaps even if Voldemort is a Legilimens, Snape's smoke > screen of rage and hatred -- two things Voldemort wouldn't care about or be > surprised by -- are keeping him from learning the truth. > > > Janet Anderson Another question to pose: Are Harry's anger/rage and Snape's anger/rage serving the same purpose? Anger is a powerful emotion. One of its functions is to protect against vulnerability. Could this protective aspect be in play, particularly with a Legilimens, secondary to the aspect of vulnerability? Julie From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 20:23:24 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 20:23:24 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127552 Yes, it's a bonehead question, partially because I am showing my impatience and asking before I have finished re-reading the book. When Harry left the prefects bathroom with the egg, he saw "Bartoimaeus Crouch" in Snape's office. Why did the name not show up as "Bartimaeus Crouch, Jr."? Julie From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Apr 14 21:15:17 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:15:17 -0000 Subject: Nel Question #9: Gender - Perfect Sense In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127553 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: catkind: > To some extent this has to do with biological differences; Geoff: That is the way in which I mean it and I'm not intending any sexist subtext. To take one example, my wife often comments on the fact that she finds that women tend to approach friendships in a different way to men. She has a small number of close friends with whom she will spend time regularly in socialising and just generally enjoying each other's company and remarks that it seems to her that men seem to operate on a more clubbable and chummy level. If you look at the books, you will find people like Parvati and Lavender huddled in deep conversations while Ron, Harry and Seamus et al will be discussing Quidditch tactics or ribbing each other or working out schemes to avoid doing homework. I think my wife's comments appear to be true in that she will have quite deep discussions with other folk, often over problems. Many men of my acquaintance - including myself - find it hard to know who to talk to or to turn to in a real crisis or a real need for unburdening themselves. Again, I probably work on the level of looking at facts to draw conclusions whereas several women I know possess great intuitive skills (which I envy). Nowhere have I suggested that any of these innate skills make one gender superior over the other. I hope this clarifies the situation a bit more. I know what my wife would say about the hole I might be digging for myself at this precise moment - "Why didn't you stay out of it and keep your head down?" :-)) From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Apr 14 21:22:36 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:22:36 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127554 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" wrote: Julie: > Yes, it's a bonehead question, partially because I am showing my > impatience and asking before I have finished re-reading the book. > > When Harry left the prefects bathroom with the egg, he > saw "Bartoimaeus Crouch" in Snape's office. Why did the name not show > up as "Bartimaeus Crouch, Jr."? Geoff: My assumption would be that the Marauder's Map magic would pick up the person's given name. It would recognise the person as Bartemius Crouch - period. Again, if you were to meet Barty Crouch, the son, in the street, would you greet him with "Hi, Barty Junior, how are you?" From tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 21:29:37 2005 From: tookishgirl_111 at yahoo.com (tookishgirl_111) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:29:37 -0000 Subject: Umbridge (was: Lucius and Antisocial PD) In-Reply-To: <009301c54056$2e6fc850$0100000a@Imma> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127555 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shunra Shunrata" wrote: > >> Shunra said: I am not up on sadism but think it would be a more fruitful direction to ponder. Tooks: (after almost over a year of lurking) - The thing with with sadism is that it is, technically, a sexual fetish. I really don't see Umbridge getting sexually excited by the pain of Harry and the others; she does seem to enjoy it, but not sexually. (I don't think she's bipolar either, though I'm not going to get into that again as it was already covered in great depth.) Though I would agree that she has some serious issues, they don't seem to fit into any set criteria for a disease according to the DSM (basically, the psychologist's handbook of mental illness). An aside: Lucius (IMO) most definiately has Antisocial Personality Disorder, and I believe that Draco will also qualify as having ASPD in a few years (it can't be diagnosed in children - those under 18 - at Draco's age it's considered Conduct Disorder). Tooks - who's a psych major and therefore not just pulling these thoughts out of thin air From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 21:31:09 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:31:09 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question- Goblet of Fire - Barty Jr/Sr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127556 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" wrote: > > Yes, it's a bonehead question, partially because I am showing my > impatience and asking before I have finished re-reading the book. > > When Harry left the prefects bathroom with the egg, he > saw "Bartoimaeus Crouch" in Snape's office. Why did the name not > show up as "Bartimaeus Crouch, Jr."? > > Julie bboyminn: I think I can answer your question by asking another question - Why didn't the Map say *Mr.* Bartemius Crouch? The answer of course, that Mr., Mrs., Miss, Madame, as well as, Jr. and Sr. are titles and not truly part of a person's name, at least not usually so. In most, thought perhaps not all, cases, a father and son simply have the same name and are designated 'Junior' and 'Senior' to make a distinction between them. They may continue this distinction later on in life as part of their identity, but for the most part, it's not truly part of their given name. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 21:38:26 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:38:26 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127557 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" > wrote: > > Julie: > > Yes, it's a bonehead question, partially because I am showing my > > impatience and asking before I have finished re-reading the book. > > > > When Harry left the prefects bathroom with the egg, he > > saw "Bartoimaeus Crouch" in Snape's office. Why did the name not > show > > up as "Bartimaeus Crouch, Jr."? > > Geoff: > My assumption would be that the Marauder's Map magic would pick up the > person's given name. It would recognise the person as Bartemius Crouch - > period. > > Again, if you were to meet Barty Crouch, the son, in the street, would > you greet him with "Hi, Barty Junior, how are you?" I understand your point that perhaps the map only shows the first and last names, but I have three comments: First, as Lupin pointed out in PoA, the Marauder's Map doesn't lie. Second, first and last names appear on the map even though they are addressed by either their first name only or by Professor ____. Third, my mother-in-law does refer to my husband as "David Junior" even though David Senior passed away 13 years ago. So, I still wonder why the "Jr." was not on the map. Julie From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 21:40:34 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:40:34 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question- Goblet of Fire - Barty Jr/Sr In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127558 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" > wrote: > > > > Yes, it's a bonehead question, partially because I am showing my > > impatience and asking before I have finished re-reading the book. > > > > When Harry left the prefects bathroom with the egg, he > > saw "Bartoimaeus Crouch" in Snape's office. Why did the name not > > show up as "Bartimaeus Crouch, Jr."? > > > > Julie > > bboyminn: > > I think I can answer your question by asking another question - Why > didn't the Map say *Mr.* Bartemius Crouch? > > The answer of course, that Mr., Mrs., Miss, Madame, as well as, Jr. > and Sr. are titles and not truly part of a person's name, at least not > usually so. > > In most, thought perhaps not all, cases, a father and son simply have > the same name and are designated 'Junior' and 'Senior' to make a > distinction between them. They may continue this distinction later on > in life as part of their identity, but for the most part, it's not > truly part of their given name. > > Just a thought. > > Steve/bboyminn Yes, both you and Geoff present probable explanations. This simply could be a "non-issue" or it could point to a flaw in the map, which could lead who-knows-where. Will be interesting to see. Thanks! Julie From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Apr 14 21:51:10 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 21:51:10 -0000 Subject: Occlumency, Narcissistic!Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127559 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > Jen: > > All of the memories Snape elicits from Harry have very vulnerable > feelings attached to them: Fear of the dementors, Ripper the dog & > being sorted into Slytherin; shock and grief over Cedric's death; > jealousy of Dudley's bike; ambivalent feelings toward Cho. > > The rage Harry feels almost constantly toward Snape may not be the > kind of thing a Legilimens is skilled at retrieving. Pippin: Harry doesn't always feel angry at Snape -- often he's very scared, for example when he's caught on the grounds in CoS, or near the one-eyed witch in PoA. And what happens to Snape's statement that anger will make Harry easy prey for the Dark Lord? Is that now supposed to be a lie? That would certainly turn the "Snape sabotaged the Occlumency lessons by making sure Harry was angry all the time" theory on its head! Pippin From kcawte at ntlworld.com Thu Apr 14 21:53:41 2005 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:53:41 +0100 (GMT Daylight Time) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bonehead Question- Goblet of Fire - Barty Jr/Sr References: Message-ID: <425EE665.000001.01040@KATHRYN> No: HPFGUIDX 127560 > > bboyminn: > > In most, thought perhaps not all, cases, a father and son simply have > the same name and are designated 'Junior' and 'Senior' to make a > distinction between them. They may continue this distinction later on > in life as part of their identity, but for the most part, it's not > truly part of their given name. K Actually in the UK it's quite rare for people to use jnr. and snr. If father and son have the same name then they may use different versions of it (Charles and Charlie for example) or one may use a middle name, otherwise you just have to work out from context which is which. A more old fashioned method of referring to such people wuld be denoting the son as the young or younger Mr. whatever, or Mr whatever the younger (as with Pitt the elder and Pitt the younger). Using junior and senior is a much more American custom. I don't recall if the Crouches are ever 'officially' referred to as junior and senior (I mean I don't remember it being used to their faces) but rather like we do on list just to make it clear which one we mean, like my friends and I used to refer to the two Jennifers in my class as Jenny and blonde Jenny. K [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From manawydan at ntlworld.com Thu Apr 14 22:01:17 2005 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 23:01:17 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Home-Schooling in the Wizard World References: <1113490958.50079.28799.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <004901c5413d$7d2340c0$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 127561 Chys wrote: >>Ffred: >>Maybe they have an extra book on their >> lists called "Welcome to the Wizarding World: a Guide for Newcomers" >>or >> something like that. >Harry, Dumbledore having known he was living with Muggles, would have >gotten that book; therefore it doesn't exist since he didn't get >anything of the sort, at least as part of his formal schooling. I'm Possibly. But an alternative view might be that because Harry is wizard-born, the automated routine that sends out the booklists would have recorded him that way and just assumed that he had a parent who would have long since put him wise to the ways of living in a world that runs on magic. That's one of the reasons that Hagrid had to go and guide him over the threshold But JKR alone knows all Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From siskiou at vcem.com Thu Apr 14 22:52:56 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 15:52:56 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <389246629.20050414155256@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127562 Hi, Thursday, April 14, 2005, 12:34:53 PM, Tonks wrote: > Ron will not do it to hurt Harry, he will be > doing it for some reason that he *thinks* will help. But it will be > a betray and Harry will also see it that way and will be deeply hurt > by it. I've seen this before, but to me it's not a betrayal if the person thinks they are helping. Betrayal is something deliberate, knowing it will cause bad things to happen. Did Harry betray Sirius when he tried to save him and indirectly put him in the situation to be killed? I do have the feeling that Ron will have some hard times ahead of him (Imperius Curse, possibly, and then there is that brain), but I don't think Ron would ever even consider going over to Voldemort side. That just seems completely and utterly out of character for him. He may complain about not having much money on occasion, but the guy isn't even able to accept gifts from his friends if he can't reciprocate or thinks it cost too much. He doesn't just want money for the sake of being rich, he wants to earn it (and not by killing or betraying people, either). -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net Fri Apr 15 02:28:55 2005 From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Richard Jones) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:28:55 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: <389246629.20050414155256@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127563 Back in November I had a editorial posted over at Mugglenet on "Ron's Sacrifice" where I analyzed a bunch of clues: (1) Ron's "Die, Ron, Die" joke (2) The chess game (3) Ron and the "Grim" (4) The "13 at dinner" saying (5) Wands (6) Molly and the boggart (7) Harry thinking he heard Ron's voice beyond the veil in the DoM (8) Ron being away from the action at end of each book (9) What JKR has said in interviews I concluded that most likely young master Weasley ain't long for this world. Richard Jones From jaanise at hello.lv Thu Apr 14 23:43:51 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:43:51 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Getting out of the pensieve In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c5414b$d0663900$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 127564 -----Original Message----- From: mz_annethrope My suspicion is that he is stuck. -------------------------- Jaanis: At first, I would like to say that this is a very nice title. "Getting out of the Pensieve". It could be a title for a good story/book. ;) However, on the particular context I would like to express the opposite opinion than mz_annethrope's. I don't think this device is so much related with time. The memories are merely like 3D movies stored in there. Highly advanced 3D movies, highly detailed. But I don't think a soul or spirit dividing of the "watcher" is involved. :) I've always imagined it more like a dream, a very clear dream. And what happens when we sleep would be similar to what happens when we're using the Pensieve in the way Harry does it (as there are different ways as shown by Dumbledore at the end of OotP). Another person may wake us (often s/he may enter our dream for a short moment until we are fully woke up - hasn't it happened to you?), but if not, then we can wake up by ourselves in the end anyway. Sometimes it could be easy, sometimes you should have to try harder. Sometimes you would see an unfinished dream, sometimes you would see several dreams in a night. But I certainly think that you wouldn't get stuck in the Pensieve (in *that* Pensieve which is described in HP books). From ajroald at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 18:45:51 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:45:51 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127565 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mallrat42g" wrote: > I have been saying this for years and years. Ron is going to die. I think that Ron's death is the only thing that can motivate Harry enough to kill Voldemort. Ron's death will be the key in Harry's killing of Voldemort. It is the only way. Even JKR lends some credibility to this theory in the JK Rowling's World Book Day Chat, March 4, 2004: Debbie: What will Ron's job be when he leaves school? JK Rowling replies -> Well, assuming he lives to leave school... I'm not going to tell you :) Obviously she hasn't committed to anything, but she's the one who provokes the thought that Ron *might* die before the end of 7th year. I agree that it is completely plausible. ~ Lea, who would really hate to see Ron die =( From mfterman at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 22:12:49 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:12:49 -0000 Subject: On Dolores Umbridge and Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: <20050414135825.47969.qmail@web53105.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127566 To my mind, the person who strikes me as closest in personality to Dolores Umbridge is Peter Pettigrew. Both of them more or less made careers out of hitching on to more powerful and important people. They were both to gain power from someone else. Pettigrew's main problem was that he first latched onto James Potter, until James more or less outgrew the juvenile need for a sycophant and then had the misfortune to be forced to switch over to Voldemort, who was more or less immune to manipulation by way of servile flattery. Umbridge had a good deal more good luck to end up with a vain and insecure man such as Cornelius Fudge. I have few difficulties seeing Pettigrew ending up a toady such as Dolores Umbridge was, flattering Fudge and gaining powers over others in turn and going nuts with it. Pettigrew was a good deal more servile in his few appearances, but in both cases he was around powerful people who were ready to slay him at any second, and he had no real backing in his favor. If he had someone like Fudge in his pocket under circumstances where his enemies are barred from direct retaliation, I think that he would have been a good deal more arrogant. -Mfterman From ajroald at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 19:34:14 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:34:14 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: <20050414101557.35608.qmail@web30711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127567 DD wrote: > > THERE IS a reason why Snape is horrible to BOTH > > Neville AND Harry..and > > JK has pretty much explained why Snape dislikes > > Harry..but she has > > never explained why Snape dislikes Neville so much! > >Laurie wrote: This has also piqued my curiosity as well. Other than > the fact Neville is lousy at potions I have always > wondered why he (Neville) is number two on Snape's hit > list. Snape doesn't seem to have much use for any Gryffindor student at all. He doesn't have any patients, sympathy, or understanding for people who are weak and/or incompetent, which is how he sees Neville. Basically Snape feels Neville is wasting his time, or perhaps not worthy of it. Just my opinion ~ Lea From laurel_lei at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 01:54:51 2005 From: laurel_lei at yahoo.com (Lori) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 01:54:51 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: <20050414101557.35608.qmail@web30711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127568 > DD wrote: > > THERE IS a reason why Snape is horrible to BOTH > > Neville AND Harry..and > > JK has pretty much explained why Snape dislikes > > Harry..but she has > > never explained why Snape dislikes Neville so much! Lori here... I believe that Snape is cruel to Neville (and Harry & Hermione in turn) as a protection to them. He therefore can hide his true feelings (of protection via the OotP) from Voldemort. Belittling Neville, as a wizard, also protects him from being "thought" of a a capable opponent of Voldemort if he is truely "the One" who was meant to destroy Voldement per the Prophecy. IMO... -Lori :) From pookiebear364 at gmail.com Thu Apr 14 18:15:21 2005 From: pookiebear364 at gmail.com (Pookie) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 18:15:21 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127569 Constance Vigilance wrote: > > The Veil. I think it is the biggest unresolved artifact in the > series > > thus far. Just to add my 2 cents.....I read somewhere an interesting point; I was said in OOP that once you go in (to the veil) you can't come out- Since our favorite godfather was able to change into a dog- and he said that the only thing he hated were the fleas- since he went through as a man could he come out as a dog??? Just an interesting (I thought) thought. Pookie From mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 14 22:07:58 2005 From: mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net (mallrat42g) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:07:58 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127570 In response to my own post, that it is not vengance that will drive Harry to the edge, it is his love for his friends and family. We have already seen that Harry is more than willing to use an unforgveable curse, but you never know which one he may use or may not use... By the way , I like the Judas/Ron betrayal thing...very thought provoking. Although...Judas wasn't Jesus' best friend, but he was a deciple. That is a very good observation. Gone Shopping -MallRat42g From jaanise at hello.lv Thu Apr 14 23:11:01 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 02:11:01 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Will Trelawney die? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54147$3a4067b0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 127571 -----Original Message----- From: LadyOfThePensieve In chapter six, Talons and Tea Leaves, she sees the Grim. ?My dear", Professor Trelawney?s huge eyed opened dramatically, ?you have the Grim." ?My dear boy, it is an omen ? the worst omen ? of death!" Ron is convinced that the wizard/witch dies who sees the Grim. Indeed nobody than Trelawney sees the Grim. -------------------------- Jaanis: As you say later in your e-mail that it may be so, I think that this really *is* too farfetched... McGonagall already told after the first Divination lesson, IIRC, that Trelawney has been predicting at least one student's death per year and we can see from the books that she sees accidents and bad omens everywhere. So, even if she dies in the sixth book, I highly doubt that her seeing of the Grim etc. is the hint given by Rowling. Why hasn't she died earlier then? If she sees the Grim and death everywhere and then after x-teen years dies, and we say - oh, yes, now I see where Rowling was heading with that... Well, I don't see the relevance anymore. It would be similar if she dies at age of 70, for example, in an accident, and you said that we must have known it because of all the clues. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 15 04:14:47 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 04:14:47 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127572 Lori: > I believe that Snape is cruel to Neville (and Harry & Hermione in > turn) as a protection to them. > > He therefore can hide his true feelings (of protection via the > OotP) from Voldemort. > > Belittling Neville, as a wizard, also protects him from > being "thought" of a a capable opponent of Voldemort if he is > truely "the One" who was meant to destroy Voldement per the > Prophecy. SSSusan: If this is really what Snape is thinking, then I think there is a bit of a problem with his thinking. Yes, belittling Neville might protect him from being seen as a capable opponent, but it also risks *Neville* himself thinking he's not a capable opponent! This strikes me as working very much against the goal of wanting the two potential prophecy boys to be as confident & prepared as possible. Siriusly Snapey Susan From bree4378 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 16:08:04 2005 From: bree4378 at yahoo.com (Sabrina) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 16:08:04 -0000 Subject: Sirius - Possibly a Ghost? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127573 I was just wondering if anyone else has thought about Sirius returning as ghost, and what that would been for the way the story progresses. "Sabrina" From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 04:50:24 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 04:50:24 -0000 Subject: Ron's Fate In-Reply-To: <389246629.20050414155256@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127574 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Susanne wrote: > > I've seen this before, but to me it's not a betrayal if the > person thinks they are helping. > > Betrayal is something deliberate, knowing it will cause bad > things to happen. Tonks: Let me explain myself a little better. I am talking about the type of betrayal that Judas did to Jesus. Many modern religious scholars think that Judas did what he did for what he thought was the right reason. He thought that calling in the guards to come and get Jesus would cause Jesus to start the revolution. But Judas was wrong. He misunderstood the message. He was not on the side of the enemy; he was still on the side of Jesus. But most people when they hear the name of Judas think of him as the betrayer of Jesus. They think of Judas as the one who hastened the death of Jesus. And he did, but that was not his intent. This whole plot is what I think we will see played out in the end days of the HP books. So when I say that Ron will betray Harry, for what he thinks is the right reason, this is what I am referring to. Perhaps I should say Ron will do something that *looks* like a betrayal and Harry will think that it is, and it will bring Harry closer to his death. Tonks_op From president0084 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 14 19:03:43 2005 From: president0084 at yahoo.com (James) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 19:03:43 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: <20050414172125.72749.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127575 --- laurie goudge wrote: > > Other than the fact Neville is lousy at potions I > > have always wondered why he (Neville) is number two > > on Snape's hit list. Snape is a bully; normally the child that gets bullied is the weakest in the class. "James" From mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 14 23:47:11 2005 From: mallrat42g at sbcglobal.net (mallrat42g) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 23:47:11 -0000 Subject: Behind the Locked Door...again... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127576 In OotP, where Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny etc... are in the DoM, Harry tries to use his knife on a door that was locked. His kife melted and the door remained locked. What was behind that door? Every time this topic comes up, people all say it is love. Blah. (How much love can be in the books?) Harry knows it is always locked, and knows that in actuallity, because Dumbledore told him,(pp. 843-844): "It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests. In the end, it mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart that saved you." He does point to love in the quote, but as I was reading that specific passage, I knew I heard that line before. It was so familiar. He used almost the same words to describe truth in PS/SS. On page 298, U.S. hardcover edition: "The truth..is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution...' Can there be more than one thing locked behind that door? Is the truth being studied as well? One other thought, how can you study love? It is a great psycological debate (I majored in psycology for 2 semesters). There are so many different types of love that it would take ages to study them all, if you really could. What is behind that door? Truth? Wisdom? Love? Does anyone have a logical answer? "mallrat42g" From thursdaymorning at outgun.com Fri Apr 15 04:36:03 2005 From: thursdaymorning at outgun.com (thursday morning) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:36:03 +0800 Subject: clueless Madame Hooch question Message-ID: <20050415043603.E1F9823CFF@ws5-3.us4.outblaze.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127577 What all does Madam Hooch do at Hogwarts? I know she teaches flying and coaches quidditch but is this really all she does? Surely flying lessons are only first year. Two double classes and coaching doesn't add up to a full teaching load. Is there a magical equivalent to gym class and, if so, why doesn't it show up on the trio's schedule? Maybe she teaches the older kids to apparate (like teaching driver's ed)? Sex ed classes? On site substitute if anyone else gets sick? Or maybe she actually also teachs one of the less popular electives? Do we know who teaches Muggle Studies? I just can't see her being kept at Hogwarts as a part-time teacher. Thursday -- _______________________________________________ Outgun.com free e-mail @ www.outgun.com Check out our Premium services - POP3 downloading, e-mail forwarding, and 25MB mailboxes! Powered by Outblaze From stix4141 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 15 05:27:09 2005 From: stix4141 at hotmail.com (stickbook41) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 05:27:09 -0000 Subject: FILK: Friday Night Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127578 FRIDAY NIGHT A filk to the song of the same name by the Darkness, on their album Permission To Land SCENE: PoA, just before exams?The Gryffindors are hanging around their common room after the end of a long week. Hermione is bordering on exhaustion and hysteria. RON: Harry! Have you seen Hermione? She's taking every class in school. She's got no time for extracurricular activities With that impossible schedule HERMIONE: Oh! Monday, Potions! Tuesday, Ancient Runes! RON: Now, relax, it's Friday night! HERMIONE: Transfiguration Wednesday!! Muggle Studies Thursday!! RON: Hey! Relax! It's Friday night Harry! Have you seen Hermione? She's got bags under her eyes. HARRY: Why do you dwell on how she fits in all her classes? RON: Oh, do you think she goes in disguise? HERMIONE: Oh! Monday, Flitwick!! Tuesday, Sinistra!! OLIVER WOOD: Quidditch every single night!! HERMIONE: I got Magic History Wednesday!!! Magic Creatures Thursday!!! HARRY (to himself): Quidditch every single night? HERMIONE: So tired I'm pooped. (proceeds with a very big and noisy yawn) Monday! Tuesday! Wednesday!! Thursday!! Been studying since Friday night!!! Can't let my schedule smother me, No weekend recovery, Haven't slept since Friday night! Oh, and I've lost all my patience For stupid Divination, now Trelawney is a fraud, all right! And when Malfoy shot his mouth off I gave him something to laugh about! RON (impressed): Yeah, you gave him a black eye! Wow. [yes, I know the class schedule may not be accurate--the link at the Lexicon was down :(] -stickbook From stix4141 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 15 05:35:08 2005 From: stix4141 at hotmail.com (stickbook41) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 05:35:08 -0000 Subject: FILK: The Quidditch Cup Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127579 THE QUIDDITCH CUP A filk based on "One Headlight" by the Wallflowers, on their album Bringing Down the Horse Scene: PoA, the Quidditch Cup Final. Having finally realized that his team doesn't really listen to his speeches, Gryffindor captain Oliver Wood decides to give his usual pre-match pep-talk through song. OLIVER: So long ago, I don't remember when That's when they say was Gryffindor's last win They said it was the legendary Charlie Weasley's skills That cured our house of all its Quidditch ills I saw the sun comin' up on a season of success A season I won't be so depressed Now it always seemed such a crime We always had a decent side I wondered how we never won the Cup! (He notices the team starting to drift off to sleep) Hey! Come on Angelina! Katie and Alicia! Fred and George, listen carefully, And `specially Harry: You and Charlie Weasley Make it look so easy We can bring it home The Quidditch Cup! I'll guard the goals As if my life depends on it And you Chasers must secure the lead Possession of the Quaffle and Everyone sticks to the plan Then a victory is guaranteed I see the Cup in our hands At the end of this match (To Harry) But only if we're fifty points ahead That's when you need to catch the Snitch And for pete's sake, just make it quick But only if we're FIFTY POINTS AHEAD! (The team is drifting off again) Hey! Come on Angelina! Katie and Alicia! Fred and George, listen carefully, And `specially Harry: You and Charlie Weasley Make it look so easy We can bring it home The Quidditch Cup! FRED (muttering to George): This speech is old. It feels just like a lullaby GEORGE (muttering back): No matter how hard I try, I can't stay awake OLIVER (oblivious): Now, I know you're overwrought And I am tortured by the thought Of all the times we tried and never won. It belongs To us and nobody else That Quidditch Cup, it'll finally have our names We always lost just because of funny sets of circumstance Remember, this year is my final chance HARRY (experiencing a twinge of guilt): Hey! FRED: Hey! GEORGE: Hey! OLIVER: Come on Angelina! Katie and Alicia! Fred and George, listen carefully, And `specially Harry: You and Charlie Weasley Make it look so easy We can bring it home The Quidditch Cup! -stickbook, on a roll From periwinklebluebear at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 05:23:33 2005 From: periwinklebluebear at yahoo.com (nicole angeles) Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2005 22:23:33 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Sept 1 In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050415052333.18261.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127580 I have a question... why does September 1 always fall on a Sunday?? "periwinklebluebear" From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 06:23:23 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 06:23:23 -0000 Subject: RE; Getting out of Pensieve - Simple - Make it up. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127581 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tinglinger" wrote: > tinglinger: > > ...edited... > > That said, does anyone have any ideas what would > happen if Snape's memory as stored in the pensieve > somehow ended and Harry was still inside? > > In the two instances where Harry "fell into" the > Pensieve, he was "pulled out" before the memories > were complete. > > Would Harry have been able to get out on his own? > Just curious.... > > > tinglinger bboyminn: I have a recent post on the Pensieve, and though it deal more with how the Pensieve creates 3-D-scapes, there are still parts of it that are relevant. Date: Tue Mar 22, 2005 2:31 am Subject: Re: Some more OOTP Questions http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126432 Go down to question #3 in this post. The first question to ask is not how could Harry get out of the Pensieve, but how could/does anyone get out of the Pensieve. Well, the first part of that answer is that other people are smart enough not to go into it in the first place. The second part is that, as with all magic, a focused intent produces the results you need. I have a theory on this, for more indepth reading I'll post links at the end. I don't think Harry went into the Pensieve or into Tom Riddle's Diary, at least not phsycially. When Harry enters the memory, it is his mind, or if you will his abstract Self or conscious awareness, that enters. His physical-self is left behind. I believe that if a third party had walk in on Harry while he was in Riddle's Diary, they would have found Harry laying on his bed in a kind of a trance. The same is true of his ventures into the Pensieve in both Dumbledore's and Snape's office. When the appropraite Professor entered the room, they found Harry with his face in the Pensieve completely enraptured by what he was viewing, and equally unaware of what was happening in the true physical world around him (Dumbledore or Snape's offices). It's the same as a Day Dream, haven't you ever been so caught up in a daydream or a deep thought that you become unaware of the world around you. You are deep, deep into this lovely daydream and some foggy hazy staticy voice in the background begins to intrude. Then suddenly you are jolted from you deep and lovely thought by a friend, family member, or colleague say, 'Hey, are you listening to me?'. In Harry's case, it's Dumbledore and Snape that bring Harry out of his deep reverie. Further, just as in a daydream, it is the encroachment of reality, that pulls the dreamer from the dream. At this point, I fully acknowledge that Harry was quite thoughtless in entering the Pensieve knowing that he didn't have a clue how to get out. But young people are not known for the great foresight. This is especially significant when you consider that Dumbledore had already showed Harry the easy and safe way to use the Pensieve. That is, bring the memories out to you, don't go in after them. So, how do you selectively bring memories out? In Harry's case, he as always accepted random memories as they came. So, not only can't Harry control the return trip, he doesn't know how to control the journey. In Harry's case, as with most youth, some thought would have helped him greatly, because /thought/, or at least the power of the mind and its desire and intent are exactly what control calling and dismissing of the memories. Dumbledore stirs the Pensieve, exciting the memories, then with his mental power of desire and intent, he summons a given memory. Once viewed, he dismisses the memory in the same way. Now for the most part, Dumbledore is wise enough to call the memories out to him, but I very much believe that at times when he needs deep clear full independant analysis of memories, he to allows his /Self/ to fully enter the memory and Pensieve. Again, re-enforcing the point that is is his abstract intangible Self that enters the memory. This level of access to a critical memory allows Dumbledore unparalleled and ever changing perspectives. So, how does Dumbledore get out? Through the power of mind in both knowledge and intent. First, Dumbledore knows how to call forth and dismiss the memories. Further, knowing this and knowing the nature and workings of the Pensieve, even his roaming Self has intellectual knowledge that his physical-self is back in his office waiting. Internal to the Pensieve, just as he does external to the Pensieve, Dumbledore dismisses the memory, and that allows his Self to re-enter his body. It's just like ending a daydream; to end it, you simple make yourself aware of the real world again. Now for Harry to get out, the first thing he has to realize is that he is not really there. Next, it to realize that his body and the real world do exist, and he has to desire to be there more than he desires to be in the memories. By heightening his awareness of reality and diminishing his awareness of the memory; he returns to reality. It's all power, direction, and focus of the mind. So, in the simplest terms, when Harry is in a memory, he is simply deep in a daydream, and to get out, all he has to do is stop daydreaming. Simple as that. See my published works- Date: Sun Feb 6, 2005 3:59 pm Subject: Re: Pensive Peeking - & it's Dymanics http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/124072 Date: Mon Feb 7, 2005 1:14 am Subject: Re: Pensive Peeking - & it's Dymanics http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/124108 You do understand, of course, that I just make this stuff up. Steve/bboyminn From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 15 06:28:48 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 06:28:48 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127582 Julie wrote: > Second, first and last names appear on the map even though they > are addressed by either their first name only or by Professor > ____. Third, my mother-in-law does refer to my husband as > "David Junior" even though David Senior passed away 13 years > ago. So, I still wonder why the "Jr." was not on the map. Basically because calling yourself John Smith Jr is an Americanism. We do not use this term at all in the UK and the series is set in Britain and written by a British woman. The use of "Jr" is so far removed from British usage that I doubt if it even crossed JKR's mind. Karen From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Apr 15 06:51:57 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 06:51:57 -0000 Subject: Behind the Locked Door...again... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127583 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mallrat42g" wrote: mallrat42g: > "The truth..is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore > be treated with great caution...' > > Can there be more than one thing locked behind that door? Is the > truth being studied as well? > > One other thought, how can you study love? It is a great > psycological debate (I majored in psycology for 2 semesters). There > are so many different types of love that it would take ages to study > them all, if you really could. Geoff: In a similar discussion, I wrote way back in message 89069.... "Turning to Love. The problem with "love" is that, certainly in the English language, it is a word which has a wide range of meanings and is often used very loosely. It can range from "I love chocolate ice- cream" (which is really expressing a liking) to "I love you, my darling" to the altruistic love which can show itself in self- sacrifice ? Lily protecting Harry as an example. I have on two occasions at least referred to C.S.Lewis' "The Four Loves" in which he writes on the four Greek words for love ? eros, philos, agape and the one which always slips my memory(!); each one looking at a different facet of love." The fourth was, of course, storge. mallrat42g: > What is behind that door? Truth? Wisdom? Love? Does anyone have a > logical answer? Geoff: The same problem arises with truth... At the time of Jesus' meeting with Pilate, '"What is truth?" Pilate asked. With this, he went out to the Jews....' (John 18:38) And, as one contributor remarked in the earlier thread, he didn't wait for an answer. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Apr 15 11:00:38 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:00:38 -0000 Subject: clueless Madame Hooch question In-Reply-To: <20050415043603.E1F9823CFF@ws5-3.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127584 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thursday morning" wrote: Thursday: > What all does Madam Hooch do at Hogwarts? > I just can't see her being kept at Hogwarts as a part-time teacher. Geoff: Your comments lead me to make two observations about Madam Hooch. First, in response to your last comment, I would say "Why not?" It is quite common for UK schools to use part-time teachers. This might be because there is not enough teaching load for a full timetable or it might be for someone who doesn't want full-time, say, a mother returning to teach after maternity leave. I certainly met both of those situations in my teaching career. Since learning to fly a broomstick is something purely for the First Years and wouldn't require many lessons, Madam Hooch may have an arrangement to come in each year in September and also be on call to handle the inter-house Quidditch matches, The second observation arises out of speculation I've had in the past but have never got round to posting on the group. We have two other ladies at the school who are referred to as "Madam" ? namely Madam Pomfrey and Madam Pince and, as an aside, in formal situations Argus Filch is always called "Mr.Filch" by Dumbledore. These folk are all ancillary workers. This leads me to suspect that Madam Hooch may be not be a staff member at Hogwarts but another ancillary worker. In the same way that UK schools have a lab technician to provide specialised support, perhaps Madam Hooch is providing "technical" support in the area of flying and is involved in different behind-the-scenes work at other times. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 12:37:40 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 05:37:40 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius - Possibly a Ghost? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050415123741.48696.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127585 --- Sabrina wrote: > > I was just wondering if anyone else has thought about Sirius > returning as ghost, and what that would been for the way the > story progresses. Nick said that he wouldn't be coming back as a ghost, so it would make Nick into a liar during what was a very emotional moment for Harry. And after Harry's grief during the last chapters of OOTP, it would really cheapen the emotions he was feeling and the small comfort he got from Luna. It would also not be terribly satisfying plot-wise as it's Sirius' removal from Harry's life that is probably going to be a major part of his development rather than Sirius' involvement in it. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From Meliss9900 at aol.com Fri Apr 15 13:28:41 2005 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:28:41 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bonehead Question- Goblet of Fire - Barty Jr/Sr Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127586 In a message dated 4/14/2005 4:44:37 PM Central Standard Time, drjuliehoward at yahoo.com writes: Yes, both you and Geoff present probable explanations. This simply could be a "non-issue" or it could point to a flaw in the map, which could lead who-knows-where. Will be interesting to see. Thanks! Julie Well as a few people have pointed out the whole Sr/Jr thing is not a British custom. Something else to consider is that while the American editions were edited for clarity its possible that the editor didn't catch the missing suffix OR if it was caught was told to ignore it. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 08:06:02 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 08:06:02 -0000 Subject: Harry and the Decision Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127587 I've been thinking about heros lately. If this hasn't been discussed to death already and if the Elfs allow. I'm a fairly recent fan of Fantasy Fiction, so I haven't read a whole lot. I'm an old fan of LOTR, and of course HP. More recently I've read a lot of Terry Brooks' Shannara series. Heros in these books all seem to have some common links. 1. The ones we like best seem to be the reluctant ones who are brought to the point where they "decide" to take on the "task". In the Shannara series they are most of the time very suspicious and finally become convinced that there is only one solution to the problem (evil) and that they are "it". Frodo decides for himself, almost, that he is the only one who can really do it, so he volunteers, although he is by no means eager to take on the challenge. 2. They never really know what they are getting into. They never really know everything that they will have to deal with. 3. They will not sit by and let evil take over. They are never apathetic. They would rather die fighting evil than submit to it. 4. They are honest, decent people who even after finding out how daunting the task is that they have taken on, will not back down or turn and run. They have a basic integrity that won't allow them to quit, even at great peril to themselves, or even death. They have committed to take on the task and that commitment carries them through. 5. They have good loyal friends who they would die for, and who would die for them (Sam and Frodo). They also have a good portion of luck. The two of these, friends and luck, often enable them to complete the task. Now Harry certainly can fit in #2, until the end of OOTP he had no idea of the Prophecy, and probably still doesn't know entirely what he's up against. Though after the BOM he must have a better idea. He certainly fits #3. He feels an obligation to jump into the battle and right any wrong that appears. Get the SS, rescue Ginny, save Sirius, etc. In GOF he decides to die fighting LV rather than submit. He definitely fits #5 as far as friends and luck are concerned. I don't think however that he is ready for the Heros "Hall of Fame" quite yet. He hasn't saved the world. He still needs to make the big decision #1 and to commit to it #4. I am sure he will do this, he's probably mulling things over in his mind right now while we wait for Book 6. But will he be forced into it, or will he volunteer? How long will he take to decide and what will he do then? He is after all much younger than our normal heros and still in school. I can't wait to find out. Bonnie - who loves a reluctant hero. From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 14:13:17 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:13:17 -0000 Subject: On Dolores Umbridge and Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127588 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mfterman" wrote: > > To my mind, the person who strikes me as closest in personality to > Dolores Umbridge is Peter Pettigrew. Both of them more or less made > careers out of hitching on to more powerful and important people. They > were both to gain power from someone else. > > Pettigrew's main problem was that he first latched onto James Potter, > until James more or less outgrew the juvenile need for a sycophant and > then had the misfortune to be forced to switch over to Voldemort, who > was more or less immune to manipulation by way of servile flattery. > > Umbridge had a good deal more good luck to end up with a vain and > insecure man such as Cornelius Fudge. I have few difficulties seeing > Pettigrew ending up a toady such as Dolores Umbridge was, flattering > Fudge and gaining powers over others in turn and going nuts with it. > > Pettigrew was a good deal more servile in his few appearances, but in > both cases he was around powerful people who were ready to slay him at > any second, and he had no real backing in his favor. If he had someone > like Fudge in his pocket under circumstances where his enemies are > barred from direct retaliation, I think that he would have been a good > deal more arrogant. > > -Mfterman Umbridge strikes me more as a "closet narcissist." That can be a tricky characteristic to detect. Are they grandiose because of the way they veiw themselves or because of their association with another? You see them flattering the object of their grandiosity, which seems manipulative. However, manipulation carries with it a sense of personal expectation -- flattery as a means to an end. With a closet narcissist, their flattery is more a way to address their sense of self through another. This is why they can "look like" someone with Borderline PD. I see Umbridge as not having the same sense of manipulation as Lucious, manipulating the system for his own agenda. I see her as a power-parasite, feeding off the power of another and viewing that as her own. Once some "authority" was given to her, she ran with it. (Give her a rope and she wants to be a cowboy.) Julie From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 14:14:27 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 14:14:27 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127589 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen Barker" wrote: > > Julie wrote: > > Second, first and last names appear on the map even though they > > are addressed by either their first name only or by Professor > > ____. Third, my mother-in-law does refer to my husband as > > "David Junior" even though David Senior passed away 13 years > > ago. So, I still wonder why the "Jr." was not on the map. > > > Basically because calling yourself John Smith Jr is an Americanism. > We do not use this term at all in the UK and the series is set in > Britain and written by a British woman. The use of "Jr" is so far > removed from British usage that I doubt if it even crossed JKR's > mind. > > Karen Thanks for the cultural insight. How is referred to in the British version of the book? Julie From kayt.williams at btinternet.com Fri Apr 15 16:13:55 2005 From: kayt.williams at btinternet.com (Fitzov de Sullens) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:13:55 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Constellations reveal HBP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050415161355.25474.qmail@web86702.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127590 MsTattersall wrote: The identity of the HBP leaped out at me when I read the description of the constellation Leo. Its principal star is REGULUS, which the article pointed out means "little prince." ... I submit that Regulus Black is not only alive, but is the Half-Blood Prince; and in book 6 we will discover that the House of Black isn't as "toujours pur" as advertised. It also opens up all kinds of tinned invertebrates about the disposition of 12 Grimmauld Place and the future of the Order. I also submit that it will be revealed that what the Death Eaters wanted him to do was participate in the Godric's Hollow affair, as OotP says that he was killed 15 years ago--right about that same time. Which means Regulus, when he appears, can sort out a lot of unanswered questions. Fitzov writes: This is a really interesting theory, and although I have not seen it discussed on this site before, I did post (on another site) about a year ago about the identity of Regulus ('Little Prince'). The title of Book 6 wasn't published then and I agree it is a promising connection. Also Regulus' death, coming at the same time as Harry was born, would appear to be no coincidence and must be the subject of some further explanation in the books. It occurred to me from Sirius' description that Regulus didn't seem all bad. He is described as 'soft' and 'an idiot' but these words are hardly condemning given the vitriol that Sirius reserves for other members of his family. How's this then for a theory ...? Shortly before Harry's birth, Trewlawny gives her prophesy which is overheard. At this time, Regulus might still have been at school and might have been the one to overhear it in the Hog's Head. He reports the conversation to the Death Eaters for which he is rewarded by becoming a Death Eater himself. Shortly after, it becomes apparent to him that his brother's Godson is the obvious subject of the prophesy and he hears of Voldemort's plans to kill Harry. He gets cold feet and reports both the prophesy, and Voldemort's plans to Sirius. The Potters go into hiding and the Death Eaters discover who has snitched the plan and kill Regulus. This would explain both how the Potters knew to go into hiding, and why Sirius now appears to feel a mixture of anger and empathy for Regulus. Fitzov [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ajroald at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 15:00:18 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:00:18 -0000 Subject: Behind the Locked Door...again... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127591 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mallrat42g" wrote: Harry knows it is always locked, and knows that in actuallity, because Dumbledore told him,(pp. 843-844): > > "It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more > terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to > reside in a body so full of the force he detests. In the end, it > mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart > that saved you." > > He does point to love in the quote, but as I was reading that > specific passage, I knew I heard that line before. It was so > familiar. He used almost the same words to describe truth in PS/SS. > > On page 298, U.S. hardcover edition: > > "The truth..is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore > be treated with great caution...' What is behind that door? Truth? Wisdom? Love? Does anyone have a logical answer? > Not sure how 'logical' this answer is, but I think it still leads back to love. Why? The quote in OotP states that LV wouldn't reside somewhere that was so full of something he detests. He certainly wouldn't detest wisdom, and doubtful that he detests truth as much as he would detest love. LV would consider love a weakness and a vulnerability. Love is also something that he doesn't understand. Therefore, I'm lead back to the conclusion that it's love. Just a thought ~ Lea From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Fri Apr 15 16:40:09 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:40:09 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Constellations reveal HBP Message-ID: <1e6.39b0962a.2f914869@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127592 In a message dated 4/15/2005 9:24:51 AM Pacific Standard Time, kayt.williams at btinternet.com writes: MsTattersall wrote: The identity of the HBP leaped out at me when I read the description of the constellation Leo. Its principal star is REGULUS, which the article pointed out means "little prince." ... I submit that Regulus Black is not only alive, but is the Half-Blood Prince; and in book 6 we will discover that the House of Black isn't as "toujours pur" as advertised. It also opens up all kinds of tinned invertebrates about the disposition of 12 Grimmauld Place and the future of the Order. ************************************************************ Chancie: I like your theory, but I'm afraid that JKR stated he was in fact dead. JKR had this to say about Regulus at the World book day chat March 4, 2004: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * Cathedral: Will we be hearing anything from Sirius Black's brother, Regulus, in future books? JK Rowling replies -> Well, he's dead, so he's pretty quiet these days. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ But of course as others have said, the HBP doesn't necessarily have to be alive, so we'll just have to see how that turns out. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 17:03:36 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:03:36 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127593 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "fanofminerva" wrote: > > Karen: > > Basically because calling yourself John Smith Jr is an > > Americanism. We do not use this term at all in the UK .... The use > > of "Jr" is so far removed from British ... I doubt if it > > even crossed JKR's mind. > > > > Karen > > Thanks for the cultural insight. How is (?Crouch) referred to in > the British version of the book? > > Julie bboyminn: Two points; first, it's an integral part of the story for Harry to confuse Barty Sr and Barty Jr, so I would logically expect all books to refer to either in the same manner. This is especially true of the Map. It's a necessary part of the story for Harry to see 'Bartemius Crouch' and think of old Mr. Crouch, when it's actually young Mr. Crouch. Second, if you remember seeing the BBC-TV show 'Are You Being Served' which has been in reruns for many year here in the USA, the owner of the store, Grace Brothers, was 'young Mr. Grace' despite being about 80 years old. It's entirely possible that /young/ Mr. Grace was a Junior; that is, carried the same first name as his father. Although, it's possible that if he and his father or perhaps older brother worked there together when they were younger, the staff might have adopted the 'young' just to distinguish between them. That is, it really is a matter of older/younger and not having the same name. Still as someone else pointed out, this would be more common in the UK than the Jr/Sr designation. I guess the key point is to remember, the confusion between young Mr. Crouch and old Mr. Crouch is a necessary part of the book. Since it is necessary, and since JKR hasn't given us her explaination of how the Map works, we can only assume that everything is in order and make up logical explanations as to how and why? For what it's worth. Steve/bboyminn From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 15 17:52:22 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:52:22 -0000 Subject: On Dolores Umbridge and Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127594 mfterman wrote:--- > To my mind, the person who strikes me as closest in personality to > Dolores Umbridge is Peter Pettigrew. Both of them more or less made > careers out of hitching on to more powerful and important people. They > were both to gain power from someone else. > Pettigrew was a good deal more servile in his few appearances, but in > both cases he was around powerful people who were ready to slay him at > any second, and he had no real backing in his favor. If he had someone > like Fudge in his pocket under circumstances where his enemies are > barred from direct retaliation, I think that he would have been a good > deal more arrogant. > Hannah: What an excellent comparison, I'd never thought of that. I think you're probably right. Although Pettigrew has been more servile when we've seen him in canon, as you say, his position has demanded that level of grovelling. He must have had quite a bit about him to do what he did, and Umbridge we know has no great talent for magic. So yes, I think that they are similar, under different circumstances. Hannah From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Apr 15 18:03:05 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:03:05 -0000 Subject: Harry and the Decision In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127595 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote: Bonnie: > I don't think however that he is ready for the Heros "Hall of Fame" > quite yet. He hasn't saved the world. He still needs to make the > big decision #1 and to commit to it #4. > > I am sure he will do this, he's probably mulling things over in his > mind right now while we wait for Book 6. But will he be forced into > it, or will he volunteer? How long will he take to decide and what > will he do then? He is after all much younger than our normal heros > and still in school. I can't wait to find out. Geoff: Interesting, your comparisons with Frodo. If you have been on the group any length of time, you'll know that I've been a fan of LOTR for almost 50 years (ouch!). I think in terms of your #1, the decision isn't altogether his; I suspect the agenda will be forced by Voldemort. In fact, Harry has realised that the decision has already been forced .... "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. It was sunny and the grounds around him were full of laughing people and even though he felt as distant from them as though he belonged to a different race, it was still very hard to believe as he sat here that his life //must// include, or end in, murder" (// - my emphasis) (OOTP "The Second War Begins" p. 754 UK edition) So I feel I would feel that he has made the decision and is committed to it. From theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 15 18:47:08 2005 From: theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net (theotokos) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:47:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050415184708.17675.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127596 > > Karen: > > Basically because calling yourself John Smith Jr is an > > Americanism. We do not use this term at all in the UK .... The use > > of "Jr" is so far removed from British ... I doubt if it > > even crossed JKR's mind. > > > > Karen > > Thanks for the cultural insight. How is (?Crouch) referred to in > the British version of the book? > > Julie bboyminn: [snip] I guess the key point is to remember, the confusion between young Mr. Crouch and old Mr. Crouch is a necessary part of the book. Since it is necessary, and since JKR hasn't given us her explanation of how the Map works, we can only assume that everything is in order and make up logical explanations as to how and why? ------------------------------------------------ So, to re-ask Julie's question: Does the British edition us "Jr." in the text or was that an American addition? If it is in the text then the point made by Karen that "jr" is not British enough for JKR to consider doesn't hold up. If JKR used it in the original text then it would/should have crossed her mind. Obviously the confusion of identities is central to the plot but having added the Jr.--if she did--then the fact that it did not show on the map must indeed be an oversight--Unless one makes the case that titles and other designations like Mr. or IV do not show. I could accept that. Theotokos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 15 19:06:41 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 19:06:41 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: <20050414101557.35608.qmail@web30711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127597 Laurie wrote: > > This has also piqued my curiosity as well. Other than > the fact Neville is lousy at potions I have always > wondered why he (Neville) is number two on Snape's hit > list. Hannah: Well, I rather like the theory that he maybe had a grudge against Frank and/or Alice Longbottom, perhaps if they killed one of his DE cronies whom he actually cared for. OTOH, I have to grudgingly admit that it's more likely that Snape bullies Neville because he is an easy target. He never mentions Neville's parents, and I guess he probably would have if he had a grudge. It's possible that the Longbottoms did have some sort of significance for Snape in his chequered past. But maybe two personal grudges against the parents of the prophecy boys is stretching things a bit far. I guess I'll just have to accept that Snape is a nasty bully who picks on Neville because he's easily intimidated and maybe (from Snape's POV) irritating. :-( Hannah From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Apr 15 19:30:47 2005 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 19:30:47 -0000 Subject: Occlumency, Narcissistic!Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127598 Jen previous: All of the memories Snape elicits from Harry have very vulnerable feelings attached to them: Fear of the dementors, {fear of} Ripper the dog & being sorted into Slytherin; shock and grief over Cedric's death; jealousy of Dudley's bike; ambivalent feelings toward Cho. The rage Harry feels almost constantly toward Snape may not be the kind of thing a Legilimens is skilled at retrieving. Pippin: Harry doesn't always feel angry at Snape -- often he's very scared, for example when he's caught on the grounds in CoS, or near the one- eyed witch in PoA. And what happens to Snape's statement that anger will make Harry easy prey for the Dark Lord? Is that now supposed to be a lie? That would certainly turn the "Snape sabotaged the Occlumency lessons by making sure Harry was angry all the time" theory on its head! Jen again: Oy! I was only thinking of the memories Snape calls forth from Harry, and not the actual memories Harry has of Snape. As you said, in some interactions Harry has feelings other than anger or rage. And no, I don't think Snape is lying there. He may be many things, but a liar isn't one of them so far. But back to Pippin's original list from post #127535, because she asked a very intriguing question--why don't we see memories of Snape during the Occlumency lessons? Pippin suggested these possibilities: * The legilimens can't probe any memories regarding himself personally * Harry's memories of Snape aren't that traumatic * Harry's a much better occlumens than he thinks, and is able to unconsciously block memories of Snape * Snape is deliberately avoiding those memories. That would really blow Narcissistic!Snape out of the water, wouldn't it? Could a Narcissist really consistently avoid reliving his moments of triumph? Jen: We don't know enough about the process to say the first example is true or false. The only other canon example we have for this is Snape's comment: "The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him." (OOTP, Occlumency chapter). That doesn't tell us whether LV can actually extract memories involving himself. And *if* Lupin is a Legilimens, which is at least a possibility, on the occasions he's looked 'intently' at Sirius, he makes comments only about Sirius' behavior and not his own (i.e., Shrieking Shack/Cat, Rat and Dog chapter). Pippin's second and third possibility I'm not going to conjecture about because my thoughts would only be subjective. Harry may not feel traumatized by Snape, and he may be a better Occlumens than he thinks, but I can't think of proof either way. Now the fourth possibility, that Snape is deliberately *not* calling forth memories of himself, we might have a bit of canon on this one. Sometimes the memories come in chronological order, but there's only one memory per time period. An example of this is the very first session of Occlumency, where first Harry is age 5, then 9, then we have a first-year memory, a second-year memory...etc. At certain times, the memories seem to come in connected bunches. An example comes in the first session, with memories about the Triwizard trounament and Cedric's death. Here's another example of a connected bunch: "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 upon him in primary school." (OOTP, Seen and Unforseen chapter). Then we have the examples where Snape is surprised by Harry's visions of the DOM and Rookwood. He clearly does not expect to see those. It doesn't seem Snape can actually control the memories. Unless there's something he's able to do prior to a session, some trick to close off eliciting memories of himself, he doesn't appear to be doing anything different when he says "Legilimens" each time, and yet each time the memories can come out in different forms. That's the extent of canon I can think of at the moment. Anyone else? Jen From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Apr 15 21:17:20 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 21:17:20 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: <20050415184708.17675.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127599 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, theotokos wrote: Theotokos: > So, to re-ask Julie's question: Does the British edition us "Jr." in the text or was that an American addition? If it is in the text then the point made by Karen that "jr" is not British enough for JKR to consider doesn't hold up. If JKR used it in the original text then it would/should have crossed her mind. Obviously the confusion of identities is central to the plot but having added the Jr.--if she did-- then the fact that it did not show on the map must indeed be an oversight--Unless one makes the case that titles and other designations like Mr. or IV do not show. I could accept that. Geoff: The relevant bit of canon is: 'Out in the dark corridor, Harry examined the Marauder's Map to check that the coast was still clear. Yes, the dots belonging to Filch and Mrs.Norris were safely in their office... nothing else seemed to be moving apart from Peeves who was bouncing around the trophy room on the floor above... Harry had taken his first step back towards Gryffindor Tower when something else on the map caught his eye... something distinctly odd. Peeves was not the only thing that was moving. A single dot was flitting around a room in the bottom left-hand corner - Snape's office. But the dot wasn't labelled "Severus Snape"... It was Bartemius Crouch. Harry stared at the dot. Mr.Crouch was supposed to be too ill to go to work or to come to the Yule Ball - so what was he doing sneaking into Hogwarts at one o'clock in the morning?' (GOF "The Egg and the Eye" p.405 UK edition) As I said in an earlier reply, "Junior" is not part of his name so I wouldn't expect the Map to show it. I think in every reference to him, the Junior is not mentioned, even when his identity is revealed. 'There were hurried footsteps outside in the corridor. Snape had returned with Winky at his heels. Professor McGonagall was right behind them. "Crouch!" Snape said stopping dead in the doorway. "Barty Crouch!"' (GOF "Veritaserum" pp.593-94 UK edition) But, to reiterate what has been said, "Junior" is never used in this context in the UK. From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 21:36:27 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 21:36:27 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127600 Just another greco-roman mythology underworld snippet: In Book 5, Filch is given the task of ferrying students across the swamp which Fred & George create...which sounds a lot like Charon ferrying the dead across the river Acheron (or was it the river Styx?). Just another thought. Discuss. -Joe in SoFla From jferer at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 00:34:54 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:34:54 -0000 Subject: Harry and the Decision In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127601 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote: Bonnie:I'm an old fan of LOTR, and of course HP. More recently I've > read a lot of Terry Brooks' Shannara series. Heros in these books > all seem to have some common links. > > 1. The ones we like best seem to be the reluctant ones who are > brought to the point where they "decide" to take on the "task". In > the Shannara series they are most of the time very suspicious and > finally become convinced that there is only one solution to the > problem (evil) and that they are "it". Frodo decides for himself, > almost, that he is the only one who can really do it, so he > volunteers, although he is by no means eager to take on the challenge. > > 2. They never really know what they are getting into. They never > really know everything that they will have to deal with. > > 3. They will not sit by and let evil take over. They are never > apathetic. They would rather die fighting evil than submit to it. > > 4. They are honest, decent people who even after finding out how > daunting the task is that they have taken on, will not back down or > turn and run. They have a basic integrity that won't allow them to > quit, even at great peril to themselves, or even death. They have > committed to take on the task and that commitment carries them > through. > > 5. They have good loyal friends who they would die for, and who > would die for them (Sam and Frodo). They also have a good portion of > luck. The two of these, friends and luck, often enable them to > complete the task. > > Now Harry certainly can fit in #2, until the end of OOTP he had no > idea of the Prophecy, and probably still doesn't know entirely what > he's up against. Though after the BOM he must have a better idea. > > He certainly fits #3. He feels an obligation to jump into the battle > and right any wrong that appears. Get the SS, rescue Ginny, save > Sirius, etc. In GOF he decides to die fighting LV rather than submit. > > He definitely fits #5 as far as friends and luck are concerned. The first thing to do is to read Joseph Campbell's "The Hero With a Thousand Faces." His book explores the idea of heroism and the heroic tale from Gilgamesh to Beowulf to Harry Potter. JKR has read it and is mindful of it. Anybody who has read fantasy or will read fantasy will be rewarded for reading this. Of course, I don't think Harry Potter is fantasy. It's much more consistent with science fiction, given that magic in Harry's world follows laws like our own physical world and exists in a world parallel to our own. Magic *is* science in Harry's world; it's researched, developed, understood. The debate of science fiction versus fantasy is endless; I found over 52 definitions of SF, but this one makes the best argument for Harry as SF: " Science fiction: the unknown is to be understood and thereby changed Fantasy: the unknown is to be loved for its strangeness" -- Nancy Lebovitz (Not the photographer Nancy Lebo*w*itz) It's the seeking to understand Harry's wizard world that bring me down on the side of Harry being SF. Harry seeks to understand this world as a student, using the same tools of inquiry that science uses. Actually, it doesn't really matter which Harry is. It's the great story of my daughers' generation. Jim Ferer From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 01:36:23 2005 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 01:36:23 -0000 Subject: Neville is The One, or the other one. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127602 Neville is at least one of the ones. > Tonks now: > I have a theory, give here before, about why Snape is hard on both > boys. He does > not like to see the orphans that are a result of his time as a DE. > TK: Brilliant theory. I had thought a lot about that one, and mostly came up with "because he's a bitter, nasty fellow." You explained why he's bitter and nasty. Guilt will do that to a person. > Tonks: > Having said all of that, I think there is some reason for Neville. > I mean JKR would not have a *spare* just for the heck of it. > Neville has some purpose, I just don't know what yet. Very interesting. It does seem out of keeping with her usual straight- line plotting. [Straight line after the fact. While you're in the middle of it, it's a maze (ing).] I can hardly wait to find out: why Neville, and why any one at all? TK -- TigerPatronus From mjfoneill at gmail.com Fri Apr 15 16:47:46 2005 From: mjfoneill at gmail.com (Marla O'Neill) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 12:47:46 -0400 Subject: Harry's emotional resilience (was Harry's emotional scars) Message-ID: <3d0aa21d050415094723728e32@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127603 SSSusan (from message #126712): > Here's this kid who has lived through a nasty, > nasty situation with the Dursleys, and yet he is able > to make friends right away with Ron, shortly thereafter > with Hermione; he seems to get on well with his fellow > Gryffindor classmates; he knows how to laugh and > have fun ... I don't see these many deep scars > [Lupinlore] suggested. I see a situation where a child > might easily be *expected* to have developed many scars, > but I don't see it *in actuality* in Harry. Any one of *us* > might have come out of that experience deeply scarred, > but for whatever reason, I don't think Harry did; he is an > amazingly resilient young man. MJF now: In an otherwise routine-bordering-on-dull workday, I have come across some genetics research that may explain Harry's "amazing resilience" vis-a-vis his treatment by the Dursleys: "Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children" We studied a large sample of male children from birth to adulthood to determine why some children who are maltreated grow up to develop antisocial behavior, whereas others do not. A functional polymorphism in the gene encoding the neurotransmitter- metabolizing enzyme monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) was found to moderate the effect of maltreatment. Maltreated children with a genotype conferring high levels of MAOA expression were less likely to develop antisocial problems. These findings may partly explain why not all victims of maltreatment grow up to victimize others, and they provide epidemiological evidence that genotypes can moderate children's sensitivity to environmental insults. So there you have it -- Harry clearly has a (very) functional polymorphism of his MAOA gene! And now back to work, MJF P.S. [the reference is Science (2002) 297(5582): 851-4, for those so inclined] From bob.oliver at cox.net Sat Apr 16 04:36:29 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 04:36:29 -0000 Subject: HP Conventional Wisdom Watch II Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127604 Okay, time for the second installment of our watch on HP conventional wisdom as expressed in recent discussions on this and other sites. Once again, as I can't do neat arrows a la NEWSWEEK, I'll use "rising," "falling," and "mixed." HARRY POTTER - mixed. Hope continues to run high that sixth year will be better than fifth year, but doubts about his eventual fate are running high in some circles. Then again, others feel that Harry's death would rob the series of its magic and hope, something that they feel JKR would surely avoid. In any case, the subject remains controversial. ALBUS DUMBLEDORE - mixed. Controversy continues to swirl with regard to the headmaster. Some feel he owes Harry a long talk and a big apology, or at least expressions of deep regret for what his decisions have put Harry through. Others see him as a saint. He is the only one Voldemort fears, yet traditional patterns of literature seem to mark him for death fairly soon. Stay tuned. SEVERUS SNAPE - falling. Excitement about the British Cover has faded, as has speculation about Severus being the HBP. Recent discussions have strongly focused on the Potion Master's many undesirable traits, and the possibility that JKR may well not see him in the same favorable light as many in the fandom. RON WEASLEY - mixed. Some see him as marked for the NEXT BIG DEATH. Others cling to signs of hope, such as his recent flowering and the Mirror of Erised. One thing seems sure, Harry's best friend has a role to play, but it remains to be seen whether it will be triumphant or tragic. HERMIONE GRANGER - mixed. Her positive and negative traits are both strong. We shall see which outbalances the other in HBP. NEVILLE LONGBOTTOM - rising. Whether as a nemesis of Voldemort or extracting well-deserved revenge on Snape, Neville remains a favorite to shine in HBP. REMUS LUPIN - falling. Not many are convinced by the ESE theory. But his behavior in OOTP wasn't encouraging, either. MINERVA MCGONAGALL - mixed. Essentially no change. Her reprehensible behavior early in OOTP was marked by heroic action at the end. We shall see. RUBEUS HAGRID - falling. No real change. Perhaps the best candidate in many people's minds for the NEXT BIG DEATH. DRACO MALFOY - falling. Few expect much from Draco anymore, except a tatoo on his forearm relatively soon. GINNY WEASLEY - rising. Faith in Ginny in some circles seems to be growing ever stronger, and even her detractors admit that she seems to be becoming a power in the Potterverse. PERCY WEASLEY - falling. Whether you see him as abused child or wretched ingrate, the outlook isn't good for the middle son of the Weasleys. LUNA LOVEGOOD - rising. More people are remarking on her possible connection with Harry, and she certainly has staunch and vocal defenders in the fandom. THEODORE NOTT and BLAISE ZABINI - rising. The Crown Princes in Waiting of the Good Slytherins. NICHOLAS FLAMEL - falling. Dead, dead, and evidently, dead. CHO CHANG - falling. Does anyone have anything good to say about the girl? QUIDDITCH - rising. After some initial debate, the consensus seems to be that Quidditch will figure strongly in HBP. THE DA - rising. The strong consensus is that the DA will continue as Harry's special project. Most believe it will be an official club, allowing Dumbledore to give Harry a shiny badge of his very own. There are many other figures, of course, but most of them have not appeared prominently in discussions over the last couple of weeks (at least not on the sites I follow). Lupinlore From steve at hp-lexicon.org Sat Apr 16 04:51:49 2005 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 04:51:49 -0000 Subject: Sept 1 In-Reply-To: <20050415052333.18261.qmail@web53202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127605 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nicole angeles wrote: > > I have a question... why does September 1 always fall on a > Sunday?? It doesn't. It's just that September 2 always falls on a Monday at Hogwarts, regardless of what day September 1 falls on. I know that sounds like I'm saying the same thing, but I'm not. In the Harry Potter universe, classes always start on a Monday. That's in the books. However, the books don't say that September 1 is always a Sunday. Think of it this way: they leave the Muggle world and enter a magical one when they take the train, and when they get there, the next day is arbitrarily a Monday. So when they leave, it might be Thursday in the Muggle world. They arrive, they have a feast, they go to bed...and it's Monday morning, September 2, and classes start. By way of example: In Goblet of Fire, they left Kings Cross on a Monday. The next day, September 2, was a Monday. Hey, it's magic. Steve The Lexicon From elfundeb at gmail.com Sat Apr 16 05:01:29 2005 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 01:01:29 -0400 Subject: Umbridge: Sadist and Stereotype Message-ID: <80f25c3a050415220152c6947f@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127606 I'm packaging together several Umbridge responses here. Warning: this post contains speculation about sexual repression, but no sex. bboyminn: > She is insecure about her looks, so she compensates with her sickly > sweet voice, her girly-girly clothes, and her affect of a sweet > pleasant demeanor. And rightly she should since her true personality > is mean and exceedingly umpleasant. I would say that she is insecure about her age more than her looks. Hence the "little velvet black bow" Harry notices at the hearing and the emphasis on her "girlish, high-pitched voice." More on that later. > Another part of her deep insecurity is her fear that she is a mediocre > witch with mediocre magical powers, and again, she is right. So, like > many, she compensates for her deep sense of personal and magical > powerlessness by seeking power. It's s form of self-validation. That's one possible interpretation, but we don't really know about her magical ability. It's true that we rarely see her do any magic (she did bewitch her blackboard), but there are explanations for that: (i) the point of her DADA class is to keep the students from learning any useful magic so we're not likely to see much of interest there, and (ii) she keeps her own hands clean by sending henchmen to do her dirty work for her. Unlike Lockhart, who really was a mediocre wizard, we aren't shown examples of her botching any spells. Besides, mightn't Umbridge have invented that quill of hers? Shunra wrote: I am not up on sadism but think it would be a > more fruitful direction to ponder. Tooks wrote (after almost over a year of lurking): The thing with with > sadism is that it is, technically, a sexual fetish. I really don't see > Umbridge getting sexually excited by the pain of Harry and the others; > she does seem to enjoy it, but not sexually. No? I see sexual frustration as the genesis of all of her behavior. Umbridge is a caricature of a common stereotype -- the frustrated spinster. Her sickly sweet femininity, her outdated fluffy pink cardigan and Alice band, her fondness for pink, all suggest an older woman who would like to believe that she is still youthful, that there is still time to catch a man. And to hammer the point home, Harry concludes at the Sorting that she looks "like somebody's maiden aunt." Like all stereotypes, the spinster stereotype has a basis in reality; I recall a couple of mean spinster teachers from my childhood (but it's an older stereotype, less noticeable in my generation where young women had many more oppotunities). Some spinsters were career women who chose to flout societal expectations for women, but many were women who wanted husbands but couldn't attract one. Between the clothes and the lace-and-kittens decor in Umbridge's office, I'll vote for the latter. Thus, her problem is not that she is insecure and/or a mediocre witch; she is repressed and she keeps it under control by becoming "more sweetly girlish as she always did when she was furious" (ch. 32). My instinctive reading of Umbridge, from the way she projects familiarity with her boss, was that she either imagined she was having an affair with Fudge or perhaps even a real affair. Ok, I'm expecting at least an "ewwwww" and maybe a "tewww ewwww" reaction to that, but it really is how I see her, though it takes some reading between the lines to get there. There's that faux pas in ch. 19, for example: "'Now, where is it? Cornelius just sent it . . . I mean,' she gave a false little laugh as she rummaged in her handbag, 'the *Minister* just sent it . . .'" (emphasis in original). Read in that light, in punishing Harry with the sadistic quill for telling the truth about Voldemort, and in attempting to Crucio Harry, Umbridge is protecting her pseudo-lover's position, but she's also controlling it. As she says, "What Cornelius doesn't know won't hurt him." That would fit the clinical definition of sadism, wouldn't it? And when she sent the Dementors after Harry, she did the same thing: She is secretly taking control ("They were all bleating about silencing you somehow -- discrediting you -- but I was the one who actually *did* something about it."). In the stereotype I think JKR is drawing from, she would not have been eligible for Fudge's position. Though she tells us that's not true in the WW (unless, of course, Umbridge is a part hag), Umbridge seems satisfied with controlling Fudge from behind the scenes. I think it's not about getting power for herself; it's about evening the score as payback to those who did not find her toadlike face attractive. Thus, the imaginary affair I posited above would not be an affair of the heart; like rape, it's an exercise of power and control to counter one's powerlessness. But I'm way out of my league here, as I know absolutely nothing about clinical analysis; they don't teach it in law school. So, I'll leave it to the experts to rip my reading to shreds. Debbie noting that (speaking of sexual undertones) Umbridge gets her just desserts when she gets left with the centaurs From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 05:16:24 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 05:16:24 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127607 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jmgarciaiii" wrote: > > Just another greco-roman mythology underworld snippet: > > In Book 5, Filch is given the task of ferrying students across the > swamp which Fred & George create...which sounds a lot like Charon > ferrying the dead across the river Acheron (or was it the river Styx?). > Tonks: I am not sure about Filch, but I have a theory about Hagrid and the first years. Only the first year students come to Hogwarts by boat. Why? Because that is a symbol of baptism. They can not come to Hogwarts, the spiritual (magical) world, until they are baptised. Tonks_op From thursdaymorning at outgun.com Fri Apr 15 16:51:19 2005 From: thursdaymorning at outgun.com (thursday morning) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 00:51:19 +0800 Subject: clueless Madame Hooch question Message-ID: <20050415165119.07BBC2B2B86@ws5-7.us4.outblaze.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127608 Geoff: > First, in response to your last comment, I would say "Why not?" > It is quite common for UK schools to use part-time teachers. > Since learning to fly a broomstick is something purely > for the First Years and wouldn't require many lessons, Madam > Hooch may have an arrangement to come in each year in September > and also be on call to handle the inter-house Quidditch matches, > > The second observation arises out of speculation I've had in the > past but have never got round to posting on the group. We have > two other ladies at the school who are referred to as "Madam" ? > namely Madam Pomfrey and Madam Pince and, as an aside, in formal > situations Argus Filch is always called "Mr.Filch" by Dumbledore. > These folk are all ancillary workers. > > This leads me to suspect that Madam Hooch may be not be a staff > member at Hogwarts but another ancillary worker. In the same way > that UK schools have a lab technician to provide specialised > support, perhaps Madam Hooch is providing "technical" support in > the area of flying and is involved in different behind-the-scenes > work at other times. Thanks Geoff. I hadn't realized this was the reason for the three 'Madams' and 'Mr' Filch. It does raise another question and still leaves (in part) the original. I am assuming that, due to the nature of their jobs, Madam Pomfrey and Mr Filch are full-time employees and live-in at Hogwarts - at least during the school year. As the *only* school librarian Madam Hooch must also work full-time and, while she might come and go every day from a lovely little cottage in Hogmead, I imagine she also lives-in. Hagrid, also an ancillary worker before becoming CoMC prof, was certainly full-time and has his cottage. This leaves Madam Hooch as an anomaly if she is the only part-time worker. Certainly it's possible but it just doesn't seem to fit Hogwarts. Flying lessons may not be a full year but Quidditch practice starts pretty much immediately, doesn't it? So whether she is part-time or full-time, lives-in or commutes, she's around all year. What else does she do? Is she old enought to have retired from something and is just working part-time to keep herself active? I can't see Dumbledore not offering her tea and a lemon drop and then going "So, Rolanda (Xiomara?), how do you feel about helping with..." Order business doesn't seem the answer because the order wasn't always this active and do we even know for sure if she's in the order? Are there any clues about Madam Hooch in the books? Does anyone have any speculation? Thursday From gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 17:01:50 2005 From: gardengirlgarden at yahoo.com (Michelle Crowe) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:01:50 -0400 Subject: Behind the Locked Door...again... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <425FF37E.4030101@yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127609 Lea wrote: > Not sure how 'logical' this answer is, but I think it still leads > back to love. Why? The quote in OotP states that LV wouldn't > reside somewhere that was so full of something he detests. He > certainly wouldn't detest wisdom, and doubtful that he detests > truth as much as he would detest love. LV would consider love a > weakness and a vulnerability. Love is also something that he > doesn't understand. Therefore, I'm lead back to the conclusion > that it's love. I read a compelling argument at mugglenet that suggested that the mysterious essence was hope, citing how Harry felt when thinking about being reunited with Sirius. I have to concur that someone as obsessed with power and control and as terrified of death as Voldemort would definitely NOT understand hope. Gardengirl From laurel_lei at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 17:07:14 2005 From: laurel_lei at yahoo.com (Lori) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:07:14 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127610 > Lori: > > Belittling Neville, as a wizard, also protects him from > > being "thought" of as a capable opponent of Voldemort if he > > is truly "the One" who was meant to destroy Voldement per > > the Prophecy. > > SSSusan: > Yes, belittling Neville might protect him from being seen as a > capable opponent, but it also risks *Neville* himself thinking > he's not a capable opponent! This strikes me as working very > much against the goal of wanting the two potential prophecy boys > to be as confident & prepared as possible. Lori here... SSS - I think that you have a point... but let me add... I don't believe that Neville's existence relies on Snape's approval or on receiving compliments from Snape. He does excel in other ways (herbology, friendship, loyalty, bravery (in SS "standing up to his friends"; OotP "traveling to and battling in the M of M) etc.) One's confidence comes from within belief in oneself. I also believe that all the children realize in some shape or form that Snape is not what he appears (i.e.: membership in the OotP, possibly good or bad) and that he has issues of his own... demons, if you will. Children are very aware creatures. I don't think they take the verbal attacks as personally as we think. It is written that Neville fears "Snape", just as Ron fears "spiders" or Hermione fears "a poor grade" or Harry fears the "dementors". Most overcome their fears and don't let them rule their existence. Also, as to the point of having "both boys" as prepared as possible, I believe that Harry and the DA have taken on that task via Hermione's idea. It was stated that Neville trained harder than anyone... a new fire was lit beneath him after the mass escape from Azkaban. And all this with the (unstated) approval of Dumbledore... he must have known about the DA meetings early on as did others... Sirius and Molly knew (via Mundungus overhearing) so therefore (in theory) Snape knew as well via the OotP. No one stopped them they just warned not to continue to avoid expulsion via Umbridge But, they were learning new skills and becoming prepared for future battles. IMO ?Lori :) From mfterman at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 18:34:35 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 18:34:35 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127611 What makes Snape's treatment of Neville so interesting is that Snape almost certainly has to know about what happened to Neville's parents. That they were tortured into madness by Death Eaters. Given that Snape is a reformed Death Eater (theoretically), there's the question of why Snape would be cruel to someone who has suffered so much at the hands of Death Eaters. If Snape was the person to switch sides, he's not totally without a conscience. My own feeling is that Snape has been trying to push Neville to reach his potential. All of the indications in the series have been that Neville was never a weak wizard. He's just blocked mentally, out of fear. Once he overcame that block in OotP, he started showing real power and potential. Snape is a demanding teacher, but as he comments, he gets above average scores from his students in the OWLs. mfterman From kayt.williams at btinternet.com Fri Apr 15 18:55:08 2005 From: kayt.williams at btinternet.com (Fitzov de Sullens) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 19:55:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: Constellations reveal HBP In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050415185508.45914.qmail@web86702.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127612 MsTattersall wrote: > The identity of the HBP leaped out at me when I read the > description of the constellation Leo. Its principal star is > REGULUS, which the article pointed out means "little prince." Chancie: > I like your theory, but I'm afraid that JKR stated he was in > fact dead. Fitzov: I agree that he is dead, and that the term 'Little Prince' probably relates to his status as his mother's favourite son. However, it doesn't stop us hearing more about his back story. The date of his death coinciding with Harry's birth is too great a coincidence to ignore. In my theory, he is the Hog's Head eavesdropper and paid with his life for being a double-agent. Fitzov de Sullens [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zanelupin at gmail.com Sat Apr 16 07:12:14 2005 From: zanelupin at gmail.com (KathyK) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 07:12:14 -0000 Subject: Who cast the Fidelius on James and Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127613 Amiable Dorsai: > I've long been under the impression that Dumbledore cast the > Fidelius Charm that was supposed to hide the Potters at Godric's > Hollow, but I can't find any reference to that after a quick perusal > of PoA. I ask because it seems odd to me that if Dumbledore cast the > spell, he wouldn't know who the Secret Keeper was. (Although, I > suppose that knowledge of who the SK is could be one of the things > hidden by the charm). KathyK: You're right. We don't get the direct answer as to who cast the Fidelius Charm over the Potters. I think for the most part when discussing this I have assumed that Lily did the casting, glossing over the whole question in favour of other burning Secret-Keeping issues. Based solely on the flimsy evidence from Ollivander in PS/SS that Lily's wand was good for Charm work, I concluded that it made sense for her to be the one who did it. But you could have something there. Perhaps once the spell is cast the knowledge of who is SK can be hidden as well. I wonder how that might work, though. Another one of my assumptions is that the Fidelius Charm must be performed with those involved present. Meaning, when the charm was sealed, James, Lily, and Peter were there. If the SK's identity was also hidden by the spell, would the person performing the spell afterward stand there wondering why they were all there? Or perhaps it's merely a matter of a well-placed (and in this sort of case, preferably consentual) Obliviate, and all is safe. If it wasn't Lily or Dumbledore, perhaps Flitwick had a hand? Or perhaps Sirius? He certainly knew the identity of the Secret-Keeper. Maybe he was there to cast the charm. I would rather the Charm be performed by one of the folks in the know (Sirius, Lily, James, Peter). It's the simplest explanation. No need to complicate the Fidelius Charm mystery further. KathyK, who has quite a Secret-Keeping Obsession but hasn't played with it in a while From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 15 19:12:24 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 19:12:24 -0000 Subject: Harry and the Decision Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127614 I wrote in message #127587: > I don't think however that he is ready for the Heros "Hall of > Fame" quite yet. He hasn't saved the world. He still needs to > make the big decision #1 and to commit to it #4. Geoff replies: >Interesting, your comparisons with Frodo. If you have been on the >group any length of time, you'll know that I've been a fan of LOTR >for almost 50 years (ouch!). > >I think in terms of your #1, the decision isn't altogether his; I >suspect the agenda will be forced by Voldemort. In fact, Harry has >realised that the decision has already been forced .... "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. It was sunny and the grounds around him were full of laughing people and even though he felt as distant from them as though he belonged to a different race, it was still very hard to believe as he sat here that his life //must// include, or end in, murder" >(// - my emphasis) >(OOTP "The Second War Begins" p. 754 UK edition) > >So I feel I would feel that he has made the decision and is >committed to it. Bonnie again: Oh, that scene by the lake just breaks my heart. But I have to disagree slightly. While I'm sure he will "step up to the plate" (baseball term for nonfans), he could still bail out. Frodo could have thrown the Ring in the River and high tailed it for the Shire to live in fear the rest of his life. Harry could possibly still do the same thing. He did run away from the Dursleys' in POA, without thinking the whole thing through. I can sort of see Harry thinking: //I don't want to do this and no one can make me. I'm keeping my head down till I graduate, then I'm off to the Bahamas. No one will find me.// Like I say, He won't do this (I hope), but it is still possible. At least it's possible for him to try. Besides, being forced into it is one thing. Facing the decision mentally on your own is quite another thing. At some point Harry has to mentally make the decision on his own. Remember at the end of GOF the graveyard scene, Harry "decided" to go down fighting rather than just let LV kill him. I just believe at some point Harry will have to "decide" to take up the challenge. The decision may be a long process, or it my be a spur of the moment decision. But, at some point Harry will have to "Decide". Bonnie From pinktree44 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 02:11:13 2005 From: pinktree44 at yahoo.com (pinktree44) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 02:11:13 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127615 > Lori here... > I believe that Snape is cruel to Neville (and Harry & Hermione > in turn) as a protection to them. > > He therefore can hide his true feelings (of protection via the > OotP) from Voldemort. > > Belittling Neville, as a wizard, also protects him from > being "thought" of a a capable opponent of Voldemort if he is > truely "the One" who was meant to destroy Voldement per the > Prophecy. Hi, my name is Connie. I am a new member and a long time Harry Potter fan. I agree with Lori. I have been thinking along that line for some time. If Snape use to be (or maybe still is) somehow connected to Voldemort (even if he isn't loyal to Voldemort) and worries that Voldemort will know that Snape truly wants to protect Harry, then he has to mask his true feelings with feelings of hate and disgust, so Voldemort won't be able to pick up on it. I suspect that Snape is a spy for the Order - one reason why Dumbledore trusts him. From soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com Sat Apr 16 02:31:57 2005 From: soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com (rockstar064) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 02:31:57 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127616 I have an issue that has been bugging me, and I would appreciate your views. I do not understand why, in the Wizarding World, expulsion from school results in a lifetime ban from using magic. I can understand children being banned from doing magic until they are of age; however, once they are of age, shouldn't they be able to do magic? It just makes no sense to me. "rockstar064" From dejjfan368 at aol.com Sat Apr 16 05:00:05 2005 From: dejjfan368 at aol.com (ebennet68) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 05:00:05 -0000 Subject: Who cast the Fidelius on James and Lily? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127617 Amiable Dorsai wrote: > I've long been under the impression that Dumbledore cast the > Fidelius Charm that was supposed to hide the Potters at Godric's > Hollow, but I can't find any reference to that after a quick > perusal of PoA. I have recently been thinking that perhaps it was Lily who cast the charm. After all, her wand was very suitable for charm work and she was an extremely talented witch. (You don't get to be head girl for nothing.) ebennet68 From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Apr 16 10:01:02 2005 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 06:01:02 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: clueless Madame Hooch question Message-ID: <19f.31cd1226.2f923c5e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127618 :::rummaging through purse for her Chocolate Frog card::: According to the text on the back, Madam Rolanda Hooch is listed only as "Flying Professor and referee for inter-house Quidditch matches" - which doesn't preclude part-time work. She is, however, available on campus to monitor/"guard" Harry when he first takes out his Firebolt (IIRC - my PoA book being currently out on loan). Unless, of course, Dumbledore specifically called her back for this duty - but the time frame seems awfully short for that. She's also listed as a former Chaser for the English Quidditch team - maybe she spends part of her time coaching them? Sherrie (yes, she DOES eat the Frogs...at $3.50 apiece? You betcha!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Apr 16 10:35:49 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 10:35:49 -0000 Subject: clueless Madame Hooch question In-Reply-To: <20050415165119.07BBC2B2B86@ws5-7.us4.outblaze.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127619 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thursday morning" wrote: Thursday: > Thanks Geoff. I hadn't realized this was the reason for the three 'Madams' and 'Mr' Filch. It does raise another question and still leaves (in part) the original. I am assuming that, due to the nature of their jobs, Madam Pomfrey and Mr Filch are full-time employees and live-in at Hogwarts - at least during the school year. As the *only* school librarian Madam Hooch must also work full-time and, while she might come and go every day from a lovely little cottage in Hogmead, I imagine she also lives-in. Hagrid, also an ancillary worker before becoming CoMC prof, was certainly full-time and has his cottage. Geoff: It's a guess on my part re the use of the term "Madam" of course but it seem to fit the data. I think that Madam Pince, as librarian, could well live off-site as she wouldn't need to be on call. Thursday: > This leaves Madam Hooch as an anomaly if she is the only part-time worker. Certainly it's possible but it just doesn't seem to fit Hogwarts. Flying lessons may not be a full year but Quidditch practice starts pretty much immediately, doesn't it? So whether she is part-time or full-time, lives-in or commutes, she's around all year. Geoff: Sherrie, in a later post, quoted from the Chocolate Frog cards. That covers her teaching role. I could envisage her doing something else as well. I assume that there must be some other ancillary staff at Hogwarts who haven't been mentioned who might be involved in record keeping or assisting staff or seeing to stock control - magically or otherwise. Again, Madam Pomfrey might have an assistant who could deal with routine duties around the hospital wing. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 12:26:28 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 05:26:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Umbridge: Sadist and Stereotype In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a050415220152c6947f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20050416122628.64556.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127620 --- elfundeb wrote: > My instinctive reading of Umbridge, from the way she projects > familiarity with her boss, was that she either imagined she was > having an affair with Fudge or perhaps even a real affair. Ok, I'm > expecting at least an "ewwwww" and maybe a "tewww ewwww" reaction > to that, but it really is how I see her, though it takes some > reading between the > lines to get there. There's that faux pas in ch. 19, for example: > "'Now, where is it? Cornelius just sent it . . . I mean,' she gave > a false little laugh as she rummaged in her handbag, 'the > *Minister* just sent it . . .'" (emphasis in original). > > Debbie Yes, I'd go along with that analysis, although I think her office crush on Fudge is not reciprocated or even acknowledged by the Minister himself. Not after all his "m'dear"-ing of the attractive Madam Rosemerta in POA. Whatever else you can claim about Fudge, there's nothing wrong with his eyesight. I wonder if Umbridge coming to Hogwarts wasn't at least part of an attempt to show off to Fudge how effective she can be, a kind of showing off of her skills and display of overeager loyalty. With this in mind, it's interesting to read again the passage where she loses it with McGonagall and accuses her of wanting Dumbledore to be Minister and Minerva to be where Umbridge is, namely the Minister's right hand person. I think it's also possible that she's jealous of McGonagall's closeness to Dumbledore, which she knows she doesn't have with Fudge who probably isn't aware of her as a woman. Of course, I've always thought McGonagall has more than a bit of a crush on Dumbledore as well but that's another thread.... Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From willsonkmom at msn.com Sat Apr 16 12:55:43 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 12:55:43 -0000 Subject: Regulus' death (was Re: Constellations reveal HBP) In-Reply-To: <20050415185508.45914.qmail@web86702.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127621 > Fitzov: > > I agree that he is dead, and that the term 'Little Prince' probably relates to his status as his mother's favourite son. However, it doesn't stop us hearing more about his back story. The date of his death coinciding with Harry's birth is too great a coincidence to ignore. In my theory, he is the Hog's Head eavesdropper and paid > with his life for being a double-agent. > Potioncat: I don't remember Regulus' death having a specific date. Do you have canon for that? From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 13:08:22 2005 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:08:22 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127622 "rockstar064" wrote: > I have an issue that has been bugging me, and I would appreciate > your views. I do not understand why, in the Wizarding World, > expulsion from school results in a lifetime ban from using magic. I > can understand children being banned from doing magic until they are > of age; however, once they are of age, shouldn't they be able to do > magic? It just makes no sense to me. Meri Now: I think the main reason for this (keeping untrained wizards from doing magic) is that they don't want people who cannot fully control their magic abilities or do not know how to use them appropriately running around casting spells and such. The poor obliviators from the MoM seem to have quite enough on their hands to deal with without having to deal with untrained wizards casting spells that they don't fully understand. Just look at the stuff Harry did before he got to Hogwarts: flying leaps to the school kitchens, turning wigs blue, making glass vannish. Just imagine what a partially trained wizard could pull off. This is, of course, assuming that this situation even exists. Hagrid is the only one at Hogwarts who we know was expelled and yes, he had his wand broken but then again at the time he was accused of a crime (Moanining Mytrle's murder)that would have warrented a much more severe punnishment in the RW. Without DD to vouch for him Hagrid might have ended up in Azkaban, and I'm not sure if his wand was broken because he was expelled or because he was accused of a serious crime. Meri - wondering if this situation is something akin to why the Jedi in Star Wars were so reluctant to take on Anakin for a trainee: he was too old to truly come into the fold and the misuse of his power was a bigger concern... From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 14:42:12 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 14:42:12 -0000 Subject: Behind the Locked Door...Self Sacrifice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127623 mallrat42g Harry knows it is always locked, and knows that in actuallity, because Dumbledore told him,(pp. 843-844): "It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests. In the end, it mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart that saved you." What is behind that door? Truth? Wisdom? Love? Does anyone have a logical answer? tinglinger Self Sacrifice Harry is always willing to put others before himself, a trait he inherited from his mother. It also is one of the reasons he is not cut out for Slytherin, as Phineas Nigellus tells Harry that all Slytherins are self serving and put their own interest above others {canon somewhere in OOP}. Does anyone here seriously think for a second that Voldemort would sacrifice himself to save a Death Eater? The self sacrifice attribute is nowhere near as common as the self serving one, and will not be found in Slytherin, but is as much a part of Harry as his mom is. It would not suprise me at all that learned wizards study this matter at the MoM, Noone has ever returned to say whether the sacrifice was worth it or not or even why it was done. tinglinger who has a yahoo group to discuss plots and character development in books 6 and 7 based on canon and books on the JKR bookshelf on her website. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From Spwysteve at wowway.com Fri Apr 15 21:29:26 2005 From: Spwysteve at wowway.com (staggmovie) Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 21:29:26 -0000 Subject: ABC To Preview New 'Harry Potter' Movie Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127624 http://abc.go.com/movies/harrypotterchamber.html ABC To Preview New 'Harry Potter' Movie ABC said Thursday that on May 7 it will preview scenes from Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire when it airs Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. "As a special treat for Harry Potter film fans," the network said in a statement, "this presentation will include interstitials throughout featuring an exclusive first look at film clips, cast interviews, and behind-the-scenes footage from the fourth Harry Potter film, Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, opening in theaters November 18th, 2005." Elf Note: Hi, everyone! The elves realized many people in this group would be interested in this info, but please, any further discussion of the movies themselves should happen on the Movie list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie/ Thanks, everyone! From hpfans at mamakelsy.net Sat Apr 16 14:50:05 2005 From: hpfans at mamakelsy.net (Kelsy) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 10:50:05 -0400 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville References: Message-ID: <00aa01c54293$93eb1510$dd00000a@kelsy> No: HPFGUIDX 127625 ----- Original Message ----- From: "mfterman" > What makes Snape's treatment of Neville so interesting is that > Snape almost certainly has to know about what happened to > Neville's parents. That they were tortured into madness by Death > Eaters. Given that Snape is a reformed Death Eater (theoretically), > there's the question of why Snape would be cruel to someone who > has suffered so much at the hands of Death Eaters. If Snape was > the person to switch sides, he's not totally without a conscience. My take on the Snape hates Neville is that maybe to Snape Neville is a constant reminder of Snape's "dark side" or shortcomings. It may be that Snape regrets things that he had done while a Death Eater and that Neville is a living reminder of all that he and his old "friends" did to others. He may be so cruel not intentionally to Neville, but out of the anger he has inside for all that he did. Could it be that Snape's conscience bothers him and that the "hatred" we see is really guilt? Kelsy From kayt.williams at btinternet.com Sat Apr 16 15:00:02 2005 From: kayt.williams at btinternet.com (Fitzov de Sullens) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:00:02 +0100 (BST) Subject: Regulus' death (was Re: Constellations reveal HBP) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050416150002.40143.qmail@web86708.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127626 > Fitzov: > The date of his death coinciding with Harry's birth is too great > a coincidence to ignore. > Potioncat: > I don't remember Regulus' death having a specific date. Do you > have canon for that? Fitzov: In the chapter title: 'The Most Noble and Most Ancient House of Black': "Sirius jabbed a finger at the very bottom of the tree, at the name 'Regulus Black'. A date of death (some 15 years previously) followed the date of birth." The events take place in the summer that Harry turns 15. 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 To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 16:08:50 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:08:50 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127627 A writer's reading list can provide valuable insight into their thinking and plotting, and I strongly believe that a writer's style and plotting never varies too far from their reading roots. Over the next week or two. I will be posting some theories and comments based on two of the books on the bookshelf on JKR's website. (click on the pen on her desk to go to the Links page) Two books I have read and have some insight into are The Little White Horse by Elizabth Goudge and Manxmouse by Paul Gallico I will have TLWH or MANX in the subject line so that I don't ruin the story lines for those who havent read them yet and do not want to know anything about their contents. A spoiler splitter will also be provided within each post so that the plot points relating to the Potter series will be above the split and the supporting "canon" from the TLWH and MANX will be below. I also request for comments from anyone who has read the Jane Austen or Dorothy Sayers books to post their comments as to how plot elements from these books parallel the Potter series. Thanks for your help and your readership. tinglinger From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 16:23:37 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:23:37 -0000 Subject: Life was Re: Behind the Locked Door...Self Sacrifice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127628 > mallrat42g: > Harry knows it is always locked, and knows that in > actuallity, because Dumbledore told him,(pp. 843-844): > > "It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more > terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of > nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects > for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room > that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at > all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also > saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to > reside in a body so full of the force he detests. In the end, it > mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart > that saved you." > > What is behind that door? Truth? Wisdom? Love? Does anyone > have a logical answer? > tinglinger: > > Self Sacrifice > > Harry is always willing to put others before himself, a trait he > inherited from his mother. It also is one of the reasons he is not > cut out for Slytherin, as Phineas Nigellus tells Harry that all > Slytherins are self serving and put their own interest above > others {canon somewhere in OOP}. Does anyone here seriously think > for a second that Voldemort would sacrifice himself to save a > Death Eater? > > The self sacrifice attribute is nowhere near as common as the > self serving one, and will not be found in Slytherin, but is as > much a part of Harry as his mom is. > > It would not suprise me at all that learned wizards study this > matter at the MoM, Noone has ever returned to say whether the > sacrifice was worth it or not or even why it was done. Kemper now: I would argue that Self Sacrifice is a type of love... ranging from love of a child (Lily) to love of humanity (Jesus). ... back to behind the door... We see in DoM the Mystery of the Universe, on a macro level, in RR the science of astro physics. Is there a mystery on the micro level, which in the RR would be quantum physics? Where Luna would have drifted around atoms instead of planets? I think so. It seems natural that the wizarding world would be aware and study the infinitely small as well as the infinitely huge. The 'Mystery of the Brain' natural opposite seems to be the 'Mystery of the Heart'... another way of saying love. And this has been discussed to death. Death, it too is studied in the DoM. It seems as though DoM would have its opposite as well: Life. My impression of the Archway and the Veil is that it intices people into it... sort of. Harry hears whispers as does Luna, drawing them in. What if the Locked Door holds Life? It's locked not to keep others out but to keep it in, because where Death draws in, Life explodes out. Kemper From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 16 15:23:01 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:23:01 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: <20050415184708.17675.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127629 > Theotokos wrote > So, to re-ask Julie's question: Does the British edition us "Jr." >in the text or was that an American addition? If it is in the text >then the point made by Karen that "jr" is not British enough for JKR >to consider doesn't hold up. If JKR used it in the original text >then it would/should have crossed her mind. Karen: Julie's original question was not 'Does the British edition use "J"?', it was: [When Harry left the prefects bathroom with the egg, he saw "Bartoimaeus Crouch" in Snape's office. Why did the name not show up as "Bartimaeus Crouch, Jr."?] Presumably this means that "Jr" was not in the American edition either - if they had approached JRK about changing this, she would have had to have said "No" because it would have blown her 'mistaken identity' plot out of the water. So, in answer to your question, no it was not in the original British text, neither does it seem to have been added to the American text. Karen From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Sat Apr 16 15:22:40 2005 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 11:22:40 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion References: Message-ID: <42612DC0.000015.01120@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 127630 "rockstar064": > I do not understand why, in the Wizarding World, expulsion > from school results in a lifetime ban from using magic. I > can understand children being banned from doing magic until > they are of age; however, once they are of age, shouldn't > they be able to do magic? It just makes no sense to me. I've been thinking the same thing. Also, my understanding is Hogwarts is a "private" school where the students are there by invitation only and their parents must pay tuition for their children to go there. If that is the case, what about the magical children that either are not invited to attend Hogwarts or whose parents can't afford the tuition? Are those children banned for life from not using magic? Are there "public" schools for magical children? Donna From laurel_lei at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 16:14:21 2005 From: laurel_lei at yahoo.com (Lori) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:14:21 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127631 mfterman wrote: > What makes Snape's treatment of Neville so interesting is > that Snape almost certainly has to know about what happened > to Neville's parents. That they were tortured into madness > by Death Eaters. Given that Snape is a reformed Death Eater > (theoretically), there's the question of why Snape would be > cruel to someone who has suffered so much at the hands of > Death Eaters. > > My own feeling is that Snape has been trying to push Neville > to reach his potential. All of the indications in the series > have been that Neville was never a weak wizard. He's just > blocked mentally, out of fear. Lori here... I agree mfterman... Snape most certainly does know what's happened to Neville's parents (tortured by the death eaters into insanity)... however, Snape is "pretending" to be a death eater... so he must treat Neville cruelly as part of his "cover"... but notice that he never sinks so low as to mention his parents... in comparison to Neville's current skills. There seems to be a difference in the cruel treatment Neville receives and the cruel treatment Harry receives. I do believe that there is a grudge that exists (i.e. the Marauders) that is out of Harry's control and would appear Snape's as well.. (But, that has been discussed to death) The only one I have noticed that is outwardly cruel to Neville concerning his parents is Neville's own grandmother. I despise her because she has sunk to a level where she is constantly comparing Neville to something that he could never become even if he wanted to you can't ever become another person And she has a "twisted" view of what her son and his wife were. Neville exists in a world where he has lost his parents they are worse than dead he is grieving "them" not the aurors (they were) that were lost to the WW that his grandmother keep mentioning. Snape, I agree, is trying to push Neville to becoming a better wizard in the only way that he can at this time, given his "dual" persona in the WW. He is also, (IMO) offering Neville protection by making it appear to the Slytherin students, the death eaters and Voldemort... that Neville can't possibly be "the One.... due to being an "inept" wizard. After all, he can't allow the Slytherins to find out (in any shape or form) that he has been at all kind to anyone but the Slytherins, therefore alerting Lucius Malfoy immediately... Who, in turn, would alert the death eaters and Voldemort. I also believe that he is (in ways) "undermining" Draco's learning... he praises him often and for very little... he allows him privilege when it hasn't been earned.... I "assume" he doesn't have to study as hard or complete many of the assignments as other children may have to... he is giving him a "false sense" of being a "good" wizard... when in fact he doesn't come up to scratch when compared to the unified front of newly-formed DA members. Their skills in (charms, potions, etc.. ) as a "group", as well as their actual "battle-time" have shown them to be a force that will need to be reckoned with in the future... How will Draco stack-up to that... he has spent many-a-year prancing about the school as a prefect and a member of the Inquisitorial Squad for Umbridge... but has he even learned a thing...? Does perfecting being a "tattle-tale" count? IMO -Lori :) From mitchbigmouth at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 16 15:26:59 2005 From: mitchbigmouth at yahoo.co.uk (michelle nills) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:26:59 +0100 (BST) Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050416152659.57497.qmail@web26401.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127632 mfterman : > Given that Snape is a reformed Death Eater > (theoretically), there's the question of why Snape > would be cruel to someone who has suffered so much > at the hands of Death Eaters. I think Snape is just a bully and sees Neville as an easy target because he doesn't stand up for himself much, where Harry and Ron always answer back. "mitchbigmouth" From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 18:07:12 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 18:07:12 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: <42612DC0.000015.01120@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127633 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > > "rockstar064": > > I do not understand why, in the Wizarding World, expulsion > > from school results in a lifetime ban from using magic. ... > Donna: > > ... Also, my understanding is Hogwarts is a "private" school where > the students are there by invitation only and their parents must pay > tuition for their children to go there. bboyminn: You seem to be using the USA version of the terms 'Private' and 'Public' which is exactly the opposite of their meanig in the UK. In the USA- Public School - in a sense is a government school. 'Public' refers to the funding of the school. Public Schools are funded by the public at large through general tax revenue and more so by property taxes. For the most part these are free schools open to all kids living within the boundaries of the local tax/school district. Students outside the local school district can be admitted, but must pay additional tuition. Since school funding is greatly tied to Property Tax, it helps explain why rich neighborhoods have nice rich schools and poor neighborhood have poor schools. Private Schools - are funded by the private individuals who send their kids to that school. These school get little or no funding from the government. Many of these schools are also maintained and funded by benefactors, founder endowments, and alumni endowments. Hogwarts, by USA definition, is a private school ('public' school in the UK), but there is no indication or implication in any of the books that students pay tuition. I have always speculated the Hogwarts was originally funded by large endowments of land, buildings, and money from the four original founders. After it's founding, citizen benefactors and alumni endowments continued to donate money to the school to support it and keep it running. If the original founders each had substantial fortunes, and those fortunes were invested wisely over the last thousand years, through investments and compound interest, the school could have a substantial stash of hard cash. I have futher speculated in the past, that a substantial number of the wizards who sit on the School Board of Governors represent the largest financial contributors to Hogwarts school. They are given seats on the Board so that they can make sure their donated money, and the rest of Hogwarts investments are managed properly to insure the school continued existance. Because of this, the Ministry has limited say in the running of the school. However, it is likely that the Ministry sets the OWL and NEWT standards, and controls the testing authority that administers those tests. Further, just as in the real world, since the Ministry is the government and they have control of the legislative and legal system, they do have the power to pass law that effect the school. Just as in real life, the government can pass laws the effect private schools. > Donna: > >If that is the case, what about the magical children that either are not invited to attend Hogwarts or whose parents can't afford the tuition? Are those children banned for life from not using magic? Are there "public" schools for magical children? > > Donna bboyminn: According to JKR all children who display magical essense before the age of eleven are invited to the school without exception. Those invited, however, are free to decline the invitation. Since, as you can see from the section above, I believe the school is supported by a combination of the Founder's original endowment and the continued endowments from others, there is no question of being able to afford going to school. In this sense, Hogwarts is more like a charity school; those who qualify are given their education for free. >From our previous discussion, it seems that many of the UK's finest schools were started as 'charity' schools. The purpose of the paying students was to support the presents of a significant number of non-paying poor students. While many of these school have gone on to become the prestigious and expensive school in the UK, they still take in the required number of charity students. Although, they aren't called charity student, there's another name for them but I can't remember what it is. As far as magic, in Hagrid's case, his magical education was stopped before he had his qualifications, and his wand was broken. So, I'm not so sure that Hagrid is banned from doing magic, he is banned from having and using a wand which in effect is the same as a ban on most magic. Keep in mind the seriousness of the crime Hagrid was associated with. Several students were injured and one student died. That's no small thing. Hagrid was very very lucky to get off as easy as he did. I think a big part of his easy sentence was that everyone involved knew if they thought too hard or looked too deep they would see that it was absurd to think that what happened was caused by Hagrid and his Spider. They had a scapegoat whose conviction appeased the masses, and got the Daily Prophet off their backs, plus put both the school and the government back in a good light, and that is all they were truly concerned with. As long as the attacks had stopped, they were ready to forget about it and move on; no point letting the facts get in the way. Also, I think expulsion is very rare. The teachers and headmaster hold the threat of expulsion over the students heads as a way of controlling them and maintaining order in the school, but it would really take something dreadfully extreme to get a student expelled. Under other circumstance, say for example, a student left the school after their third year. Once they were of age, there would be nothing to stop them from using magic or owning a wand. Hagrid was restricted by an official sanction against him. What has to happen now for Hagrid to be a full wand-carrying wizard, is for that official sanction to be /officially/ overturned. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Sat Apr 16 19:41:49 2005 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 15:41:49 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Umbridge: Sadist and Stereotype In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a050415220152c6947f@mail.gmail.com> References: <80f25c3a050415220152c6947f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <42f7e87c465ce01cc6a4a8c21d3d057f@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127634 On Apr 16, 2005, at 1:01 AM, elfundeb wrote: > bboyminn: > > > Another part of her deep insecurity is her fear that she is a > mediocre > > witch with mediocre magical powers, and again, she is right. So, > like > > many, she compensates for her deep sense of personal and magical > > powerlessness by seeking power. It's s form of self-validation. > > That's one possible interpretation, but we don't really know about her > magical ability...Unlike Lockhart, who really was a mediocre wizard, > we > aren't shown examples of her botching any spells. > I think we see some strong hints that Umbridge is a rather mediocre wizard. Remember the swamp? The swamp that Umbridge couldn't remove and that existed when the educational examiners arrived. Very embarrassing for her. I'm sure that Umbridge did everything, except ask for help, to get rid of it. At one point, Harry muses that either Prof. Flickwick or Prof. McGonagall could have undone any of the twins' mayhem in short order. According to Ginny at the end of OotP, Prof. F. took no time at all (minutes?) to get rid of it. If Umbridge simply lacked a little bit of knowledge, rather than the ability, to get rid of the swamp with a little bit of research I'm sure that she would have gotten rid of it too. Barbara Roberts [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 21:39:08 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:39:08 -0000 Subject: Minerva McGonagall Was: Re: HP Conventional Wisdom Watch II In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127635 >Lupinlore: MINERVA MCGONAGALL - mixed. Essentially no change. Her > reprehensible behavior early in OOTP was marked by heroic action at > the end. We shall see. Alla: Personally I hope that Minerva will rise even more. I like her a lot. To me she is the srict disciplinarian, which I can never call Snape. :-) I like her for at least trying to object to Dumbledore's decision to leave Harry with Dursleys. I like her for being strict with Trio ( 50 points from each, anyone?) and still loving Quidditch so much that she could not resist the temptation to get Harry on the team ( that is of course strictly my opinion that minerva was not as much playing favourites with Harry, but playing favourites with teams) I adore her for being a professional enough who would not badmouth her colleagues in front of the students. I love her for promising Harry that she would help him become Auror, even if that would be the last thing she would do. I love her if for nothing else in OOP, then for "it unscrews the other way". I love her for putting Snape in his place at the end and still being professional about it. I disagree that her behaviour in OOP was reprehensible. I think she was honestly trying to keep Harry out of trouble. Was the advice she give an incorrect one? In my opinion, yes, I think that even if everybody tried to avoid Umbridge she would find a way to hurt Harry and other students. I think Umbridge had to be dealt with ASAP, because to me she is just as evil as Voldemort, but I don't think that McGonagall behaved reprehensibly. JMO, of course. Alla, who decided that Minerva needed a little bit of love from me. :--) From soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com Sat Apr 16 21:30:30 2005 From: soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com (rockstar064) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 21:30:30 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127636 > bboyminn: > As far as magic, in Hagrid's case, his magical education was > stopped before he had his qualifications, and his wand was broken. > So, I'm not so sure that Hagrid is banned from doing magic, he is > banned from having and using a wand which in effect is the same > as a ban on most magic. > > Also, I think expulsion is very rare. The teachers and headmaster > hold the threat of expulsion over the students heads as a way of > controlling them and maintaining order in the school, but it would > really take something dreadfully extreme to get a student > expelled. Well, I am also considering the fact that for the few minutes Harry was expelled, they wrote that someone would be coming to destroy his wand. The way they worded it implied that it was the normal procedure in an expulsion, otherwise they would have waited till the initially mentioned trial. Another thing to consider, possibly, is the presence of the Kwikspell program. If it is true that the reason for the ban on magic is due to the ministry not wanting uneducated wizards causing mayhem, what if someone comes to magic late in life, as I believe JK has mentioned, or squibs attempting magic. It seems an injustice to me. Another thought I had was, could the expelled wizard go to another school? I'm not sure of the common practices throughout the rest of the world, but in the US, an expelled student can simply go to another school. Also, in OOTP, Seamus mentioned that his mother didn't want him to return to Hogwarts. I wonder what his mother had in mind, Homeschooling? Another School? Just plain dropping out? If expulsion does, indeed, come with a lifetime ban on performing magic, I believe that many of the authority figures are way too hasty to mention expulsion as a punishment. "rockstar064" From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Apr 16 22:09:54 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 22:09:54 -0000 Subject: Behind the Locked Door...Self Sacrifice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127638 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tinglinger" wrote: mallrat42g: What is behind that door? Truth? Wisdom? Love? Does anyone > have a logical answer? tinglinger: > Self Sacrifice > Harry is always willing to put others before himself, a trait he > inherited from his mother. It also is one of the reasons he is not > cut out for Slytherin, as Phineas Nigellus tells Harry that all > Slytherins are self serving and put their own interest above > others {canon somewhere in OOP}. Does anyone here seriously think > for a second that Voldemort would sacrifice himself to save a > Death Eater? > The self sacrifice attribute is nowhere near as common as the > self serving one, and will not be found in Slytherin, but is as > much a part of Harry as his mom is. Geoff: Thinking along a similar line to Kemper, "Greater love has no-one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." (John 15:13) So self sacrifice equates with love - real, deep agape love. From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Sat Apr 16 23:25:07 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 23:25:07 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127639 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > I am not sure about Filch, but I have a theory about Hagrid and the > first years. Only the first year students come to Hogwarts by boat. > Why? Because that is a symbol of baptism. They can not come to > Hogwarts, the spiritual (magical) world, until they are baptised. Ooh! Good call! Another tidbit on Argus Filch is that "Argus" is the name of Odysseus' dog (the only one to recognize hime when he had returned from the Trojan War after 20 years) and also a 100-eyed giant who guarded stuff for the various gods. Further along the greco-roman mythology vein, it turnes out that Hermione is the Anglicized/feminine of "Hermes" a god who did teh following, verrrrrrry interesting things: * Gave Odysseus "moly," the magic plant which offered protection against enchantment by a witch.(!) * Gave Hades' helmet of invisibility (!) to the hero Perseus in order to help him slay Medusa. * During the Giants' revolt (!), Hermes, wearing Hades' helmet of invisibility (!), killed the giant Hippolytus * Rescued Io, one of Zeus' lovers, who had been transformed into a cow and was guarded by Argus, the 100-eyed giant. Hermes slew Argus and set Io free. Hermes is sometimes called Argiphontes, for having killed the All-seeing Argus Curiouser and curiouser... Discuss. -Joe in SoFla From catlady at wicca.net Sun Apr 17 03:44:58 2005 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 03:44:58 -0000 Subject: UnderageMagic/GoodGuys/AdultWizards/Histrionic /Muggleborn/TheDoor/Hooch/Cho Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127640 Dysis wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127388 : << However, I'm most interested in how the Ministry didn't send [young Snape] a letter for Underage Wizardry. The Ministry uses special magic to detect when an underage wizard has done magic. Yet, we see a teenager doing magic in his own bedroom without any qualms. Does he know some sort of spell that shields him from the special magic that the Ministry uses to detect underage magic? But what bothers me even more is that the Ministry doesn't have a special detector of the Unforgivable Curses in general, and not just by underage wizards. Why can the Ministry detect Underage Wizardry, which isn't more than a felony, when it can't detect Unforgivable Curses? Magic is magic, isn't it? >> My theory is that the Ministry has detectors that show where magic is being done. Not what the magic, not if it's Dark or even Unforgiveable. Not by whom it's done. So the home of a wizarding family would constantly show on the detectors -- not only magic done by the adults even to wash the dinners, but also all the magic devices like the famous Weasley clock. So no child of a wizarding family would ever get a letter of admonishment for underage wizarding: the ministry wouldn't know that it was an underage person who did the magic. When Harry first got a letter about underage magic, the magic had actually been done by Dobby; it was not only not underage magic, it wasn't even *human* magic, but the Ministry couldn't tell what kind of magic it was and just ASSUMED Harry had done it because they had no record of any other magic person living there. Incidentally, that also explains how Hermione could try a few spells from her new textbooks before she went to Hogwarts: supposing that the spells showed on the Ministry's detectors, the Ministry had no record of any magic person living in that neighborhood, so they had no name of a person to whom to send an admonishment, as well as no age of a person to know if he/she was underage. I guess the Ministry only finds out who is a Muggle-born witch or wizard after they ARRIVE at Hogwarts. (The above written before I read the posts by Imamommy, Deeble, Ann Crutchley, Carol, and others.) Magda wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127397 : << I don't think it's that philosophical a question. At the end of the day a good guy is someone who's on the side of right, not someone who's just pleasant or nice or "not a git" or "people like us". >> Suppose some not yet very well known member of the Order of the Phoenix makes his debut as a major character by *raping* Hermione at HQ. And we see Hermione crying on Tonks's shoulder; Tonks is very shocked and wants to arrest the bloke to be tried for rape by the Department of Magical Law Enforcement, and Hermione says NO! Order secrets might be revealed during the investigation and trial! so Tonks says, at least tell Dumbledore and ask DD to punish the perpetrator. And eventually Hermione tells DD and DD tells her he will have a word with the bloke, but asks her if she can bring herself to keep this event completely secret, because the bloke is too useful in the fight against Voldemort to expel him from the Order ... is this bloke a good guy? Some listies think that Snape's daily behavior is closer, on the scale of badness, to rape than to being unpleasant. << it's still rather scary how [Harry] handed over the map to Fake!Moody in GOF largely on the basis of an apparent mutual distaste for Snape. >> Fake!Moody was a *professor*. Harry handed over the map because he was *obeying the authority*. Poor Harry, people are always dumping on him for being disobedient, and then when he does obey, he gets dumped on again (j/k). Deborah wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127451 : << What do adult wizards and witches do to qualify for employment? >> Canon indicates that it has a lot to do with getting OWLs and NEWTs, followed by on-the-job training. I personally think there are both apprenticeships and vocational schools as well as independent study. << How do they enjoy themselves in their spare time? Do they read for pleasure? If all they get are the newspapers we know about, they must be very slow readers ... and the wireless doesn't seem too appealing either. >> There appear to be a huge number of periodicals in the British wizarding world, and a tremendous number of books -- Flourish and Blotts is not a small shop. I don't know if they have fiction other than celebrity memoirs. I don't know if they have plays. They have live music (A Celestina Warbeck concert is advertised on the Rumors section of JKR's website, and DD's and Flamel's Famous Wizard Cards in PS/SS describe one as an opera-lover and the other as adoring IIRC string quartets.) They have recorded music -- QTTA mentions that Celestina Warbeck recorded some Quidditch team's fight song as a fund-raiser for St Mungo's. Oh, and passionately following Quidditch is another thing they can do with their leisure time. Even playing amateur Quidditch. And one of those Famous Wizards cards mention playing lawn bowling, while Fabulous Beasts mentions Gobstones Tournaments for adults. << I really do feel sorry for them! And this is Britain, remember - land of the evening course, the Women's Institute, the harvest festival vegetable competition, the choir practice and the charity fundraising tea. Their lives are surely not empty ... but I'd love to know how they are filled. >> They have the Witches' Institute (I can't imagine that the Brits don't when the Yanks do, as shown by middle-aged witches on lawn chairs under banner 'Salem Witches' Institute' at Quidditch World Cup, considering that the Muggle Women's Institute is so unknown to USAmerican readers that listies are always assuming that those ladies at the QWC are from a girl's school or women's college.) OoP US edition page 568: << Rita looked disparagingly at Luna. "I'm guesssing that your father runs some stupid little viallage newsletter?" she said. "'Twenty-five Ways to Mingle with Muggles' and the dates of the next Bring-and-Fly Sale?" >> While all that *proves* is Bring-and-Fly Sales, to me it sounds like they have all those things you mentioned. Kemper wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127496 : << Umbridge. She wears a lot of rings. For me, this is almost always a sign of a Borderline or a Histrionic. >> For almost two decades, I always wore a lot of rings. Then I suddenly stopped. Does that mean my diagnosis suddenly changed? (I stopped because my fingers started itching to drive me crazy. I gave up all jewelry that touches my skin, eventually even wristwatch.) Demetra wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127533 : << Histrionic Personality Disorder Personality disorder characterized by at least 3 of the following: y. self-dramatization, theatricality, exaggerated expression of emotions; z. suggestibility, easily influenced by others or by circumstances; aa. shallow and labile affectivity; bb. continual seeking for excitement, appreciation by others, and activities in which the patient is the center of attention; cc. inappropriate seductiveness in appearance or behavior; dd. over-concern with physical attractiveness. Associated features may include egocentricity, self-indulgence, continuous longing for appreciation, feelings that are easily hurt, and persistent manipulative behavior to achieve own needs. >> Umbridge? Elfundeb covered CC and DD in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127606 and "egocentricity, self-indulgence, continuous longing for appreciation, feelings that are easily hurt, and persistent manipulative behavior to achieve own needs" are displayed in every scene where she appears. Ffred manawydan wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127561 : << But an alternative view might be that because Harry is wizard-born, the automated routine that sends out the booklists would have recorded him that way and just assumed that he had a parent who would have long since put him wise to the ways of living in a world that runs on magic. That's one of the reasons that Hagrid had to go and guide him over the threshold >> That's what I think, but your post nudged me to wonder which Hogwarts Letter was sent to Dean Thomas -- JKR's website mentioned that his late father was, unbeknownst to both Dean and his mother, a wizard. Mallrat42g wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127576 : << What was behind that door? Every time this topic comes up, people all say it is love. (snip) "It contains a force that is at once more wonderful and more terrible than death, than human intelligence, than forces of nature. It is also, perhaps, the most mysterious of the many subjects for study that reside there. It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests. In the end, it mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart that saved you." (snip) What is behind that door? Truth? Wisdom? Love? Does anyone have a logical answer? >> Neither Truth nor Wisdom took Harry to 'save Sirius' that night. Thursday morning asked in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127577 : << What all does Madam Hooch do at Hogwarts? I know she teaches flying and coaches quidditch but is this really all she does? Surely flying lessons are only first year. Two double classes and coaching doesn't add up to a full teaching load. (snip) I just can't see her being kept at Hogwarts as a part-time teacher. >> Well, I am absolutely certain that McGonagall and Hooch have been a couple for a very long time and live in the same quarters in Hogwarts Castle, so it's not like she costs too much to work part-time. (My canonical evidence for this ship: "Isn't it OBVIOUS??!") I personally believe, even tho' it is not stated in canon, that Hooch coaches everyone who wants to play Quidditch, not just the House Team members. She could have as full a teaching load as any Muggle PE teacher or coach. Ron could have been practising Quidditch for four years instead of waiting until there was a vacancy on the team -- presumably he didn't because he was scared of the twins poking fun at him. Lupinlore wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127604 : << CHO CHANG - falling. Does anyone have anything good to say about the girl? >> I like Cho. I still think Harry/Cho would have been a good ship with a future if they weren't both so immature. She was a nice kid in GoF when she didn't wear a 'Harry Potter Stinks' badge even tho' Harry was her boyfriend's rival, and she was a nice kid in OoP when she verbally defended Marietta. But getting her attraction to Harry and her concern to learn about Cedric's last moments mixed up together, topped off with expecting Harry to understand her feelings (that she didn't entirely understand herself!) even tho' he was a year younger than she and even more traumatised ... well, all I can say is that when I was 16, I made just as big a mess of my love life, and I didn't have her excuse. From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sun Apr 17 04:20:08 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 04:20:08 -0000 Subject: Minerva McGonagall Was: Re: HP Conventional Wisdom Watch II In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127641 > Alla: > > Personally I hope that Minerva will rise even more. I like McG but I do agree that her stock fell a little in OOTP. To me, she reminded me a little of one of the really strict nuns I had when I went to Catholic school. A good, moral person and a good teacher when it came to academics, but someone who just didn't possess the flexibility needed to adapt to a changing hogwarts. The only times she ever really stands up for Harry to anyone is when she can do it within the bounds of her own authority. She never really steps away from being a school master so when Harry needed someone outside of those bounds she was totally unable to step up. Before OOTP, DD had that ability, which was the reason why I liked him. He could see the wide gulf between what was right and what was the rules. > I disagree that her behaviour in OOP was reprehensible. Yeah, I wouldn't call it reprehensible either, but I do think she dropped the ball in year five except towards the end when Umbridge reached a point that even McG couldn't countenance. She should have seen that Harry was drowning and done something to help him (beyond punishing him for not towing the line). It is, after all, her job as his head of house. Bottom line, when the enemy is working within the rules, you have to move outside of them if you want to win, and McGonagall just couldn't do it until it was far too late. phoenixogd2000. PS--how is legends coming Alla? Liking it? From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 04:38:08 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 04:38:08 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127642 rockstar: > > Well, I am also considering the fact that for the few minutes Harry was expelled, they wrote that someone would be coming to destroy > his wand. Is that anything like the mean old man at the restaurant who clips your creditcard in half if you messed up one night. ^_^; You can always get another one right? Olivander said something about 'first' wand so maybe they come in to get a new fitting like shoes? Maybe the old ones wear out after a while? Or just break or are snapped like the above^ mentioned wands? Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 04:41:52 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 04:41:52 -0000 Subject: Life was Re: Behind the Locked Door...Self Sacrifice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127643 > Kemper: > What if the Locked Door holds Life? It's locked not to keep others > out but to keep it in, because where Death draws in, Life explodes > out. > > > Are you saying it's something like Pandora's box then? Hope perhaps? I don't get it, Voldie WANTS life so why would he be repulsed by it being so great in Harry? (Aside from the fact he hasn't been able to kill him yet...) Chys From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 04:44:43 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 04:44:43 -0000 Subject: Minerva McGonagall Was: Re: HP Conventional Wisdom Watch II In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127644 Phoenixgod 2000: I like McG but I do agree that her stock fell a little in OOTP. To me, she reminded me a little of one of the really strict nuns I had when I went to Catholic school. A good, moral person and a good teacher when it came to academics, but someone who just didn't possess the flexibility needed to adapt to a changing hogwarts. The only times she ever really stands up for Harry to anyone is when she can do it within the bounds of her own authority. She never really steps away from being a school master so when Harry needed someone outside of those bounds she was totally unable to step up. Alla: True, I suppose , but woudn't you agree that these were always limitations on her character to act within the bounds of her authority? I think she indeed acted very true to her character and in fact tried to make the best out of it. I am not saying that she MADE the best out of it, I am just saying that she tried. Phoenixgod: Before OOTP, DD had that ability, which was the reason why I liked him. He could see the wide gulf between what was right and what was the rules. Alla: Oh, do not get me started. :--) > phoenixogd2000. > > PS--how is legends coming Alla? Liking it? Alla: I am SO grateful to you for recommending those books. I am almost done - halfway through the last part and don't want to read about Raistlin's end. In "Raistlin v Snape" I definitely, definitely vote for Raist. Thank you. Alla. From bob.oliver at cox.net Sun Apr 17 05:48:23 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:48:23 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127645 I saw this question on another site and thought I'd try it out here. What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? My list includes: 1) Harry recovering too quickly and easily from the various things that have happened. Also Harry forgiving various people for various things too easily. 2) Not seeing more of Remus and learning more from him about James and Lily. 3) Not having both Quidditch and the DA in the next book. 4)Hermione not getting a much-needed lesson in humility and understanding. 5) Having yet ANOTHER "I trust Severus Snape" moment in Dumbledore's office (or anywhere else, for that matter). 6) The Weasleys and Percy not reaching some kind of resolution, whatever it may be. 7) Seeing a great deal of Grawp. 8) Harry not moving along the route of becoming an auror (if that is still what he wants to do). 9) Not having some revelations on the shipping front. 10) Ron's vision in the Mirror of Erised coming literally true. 11) Not seeing more of Tonks and her powers. 12) Not learning that something exceedingly nasty has come of Umbridge. Lupinlore From juli17 at aol.com Sun Apr 17 06:33:34 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 02:33:34 EDT Subject: HP Conventional Wisdom Watch II Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127646 Lupinlore wrote: > ALBUS DUMBLEDORE - mixed. Controversy continues to swirl with regard > to the headmaster. Some feel he owes Harry a long talk and a big > apology, or at least expressions of deep regret for what his > decisions have put Harry through. Others see him as a saint. He is > the only one Voldemort fears, yet traditional patterns of literature > seem to mark him for death fairly soon. Stay tuned. Julie: Some--perhaps most--of us see DD as something between a coldhearted manipulator and a saint. When I read OoTP, I perceived his regret during his apology to Harry to be genuine and heartfelt. I know you didn't, but we all have our own perceptions. I see DD (great wizard or not) as a man who is as capable of flawed decisions as the next, but who also genuinely cares about Harry. It's quite a burden to carry, caring deeply about Harry's welfare, yet not being able to let that concern interfere with preparing Harry to do what he must to perserve the welfare of all the thousands of other lives at stake. I certainly wouldn't want it! I do agree that the traditional pattern of literature probably marks DD for death. But perhaps JKR will divert from this pattern. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com Sun Apr 17 05:00:10 2005 From: soulbrotha at mikaelmartin.com (rockstar064) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:00:10 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127647 > rockstar: > > Well, I am also considering the fact that for the few minutes > > Harry was expelled, they wrote that someone would be coming to > > destroy his wand. >Chys: > You can always get another one right? Olivander said something > about 'first' wand so maybe they come in to get a new fitting > like shoes? Maybe the old ones wear out after a while? Or just > break or are snapped like the above^ mentioned wands? I wonder... Maybe the destroying of the wand is just a ceremonial kind of practice during expulsion; you know, to seal the deal. I just hope Harry is careful; we know now that Harry needs to keep the wand he has, and destruction of his wand would be detrimental. Unless, of course, another wand could be made especially for Harry using another feather of Fawkes'? I'm not sure that this would work, though, as Fawkes has undoubtedly been reborn many times since the initial wands were made. I can't remember; do they destroy the wands for any other crimes? Do they destroy wands before sending someone to Azkaban? ~rockstar064 From dejjfan368 at aol.com Sun Apr 17 05:23:30 2005 From: dejjfan368 at aol.com (ebennet68) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:23:30 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127648 > tinglinger: > I also request for comments from anyone who has read the > Jane Austen or Dorothy Sayers books to post their comments > as to how plot elements from these books parallel the > Potter series. I have read the Austen canon several times over. I'd have to put some thought into a more thorough answer but here are a few things: 1. JKR got the name for Filch's cat, Mrs. Norris, from the book Mansfield Park. She was the aunt to the heroine of the novel, Fanny Price, and was terrible to her. Fanny's parents were poor and Mrs. Norris persuaded her more wealthy sister and her husband, the Bertrams, to take her in. Mrs. Norris didn't exactly die but she didn't exactly find a happy ending for herself. 2. Jane Austen is a masterful storyteller, creating phenomenal characters and weaving plotlines so effortlessly. Jane only wrote 6 completed novels in her lifetime. They are still debated and discussed at length some 200 years after her death. JKR's style mirrors Austen's and I think these novels will follow suit in being debated and studied as well. 3. Austen couldn't help but poke fun at society's flaws and shortcomings. JKR has done the same thing I believe in her presentation of the wizarding world. 4. One last thing for now, all of the heroines had happy endings. Could that be the same thing for Harry? We shall see. Just some random thoughts, ebennet68 (who gets her yahoo name from Elizabeth Bennet from Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen) From naama_gat at hotmail.com Sun Apr 17 10:19:39 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 10:19:39 -0000 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville In-Reply-To: <00aa01c54293$93eb1510$dd00000a@kelsy> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127649 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kelsy" wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "mfterman" > > > What makes Snape's treatment of Neville so interesting is that > > Snape almost certainly has to know about what happened to > > Neville's parents. That they were tortured into madness by Death > > Eaters. Given that Snape is a reformed Death Eater (theoretically), > > there's the question of why Snape would be cruel to someone who > > has suffered so much at the hands of Death Eaters. If Snape was > > the person to switch sides, he's not totally without a conscience. > > > My take on the Snape hates Neville is that maybe to Snape Neville > is a constant reminder of Snape's "dark side" or shortcomings. It > may be that Snape regrets things that he had done while a Death > Eater and that Neville is a living reminder of all that he and his > old "friends" did to others. He may be so cruel not intentionally > to Neville, but out of the anger he has inside for all that he did. > Could it be that Snape's conscience bothers him and that the "hatred" we see is really guilt? > Why is he cruel to Hermione? Why is he cruel to Harry? Why is he generally nastier to Gryffindors? Are there mitigating circumstances, special motives that explain (away) his nastiness to each of these? Because, obviously, Hermione and Harry can't remind Snape of his shortcomings (Hermione, in particualr, being a top student). People explain Snape's treatment of Harry variously (and in various combinations): because of the James assication, to prevent Harry from feeling too important, as a cover ... I can't remember them all. Hermione: Not a lot of explanations here. Mostly, that he feels threatened by her intellectual brilliance. Gryffindors in general: mostly, to maintain his cover. Apparently, being nasty is Snape's preferred mode of response to many situations and people. Doesn't that say something about him? And doesn't it kind of bring us back to the simplest, most obvious answer - that he is horrible to people because he is a "horrible person" (in quotes because that's how JKR describes him)? Naama From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 17 09:53:19 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 09:53:19 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127650 Hi everyone! I haven't been here for a while so I hope you are all well. Apologies if this one's already been discussed (there's too many topics to look back through!) but I had one of my 'sudden thoughts' in the wee small hours and you know how things can get on your mind when you should be going to sleep! I was wondering what Harry etc are supposed to do when they leave Hogwarts? I know some careers are mentioned, but they're vague or general, and as far as I can tell, the curriculum at Hogwarts doesn't cater for any genuine ones. As I see it, the students either go back to the muggle world where magic is strictly controlled or forbidden and so they therefore have no useful qualifications at all, or they go into the 'parallel' world where all the countless other witches and wizards live (wherever that is), to make a living doing what, exactly? All they learn at Hogwarts are party tricks, eg say a latin word and turn one thing into something else, or levitate something, or make a peculiar potion, and so on. That's all very clever, but what's the point? In the muggle world that would mean they could set up a phenomenally profitable manufacturing business where they cast spells to turn rubbish into something valuable to flog to muggles, or perhaps run highly efficient removal services by levitating heavy objects to nearby dumps... but isn't that kind of thing forbidden? So in the wizard world there would be thousands of students every year all with the same general knowledge of magic that's hardly going to set them up in a career. After all, if you have so much magic at your fingertips, why would you need to go on and study a dull university subject and then get a mundane career? So my question is how do they make a living in the adult world, bearing in my they've spent seven years at The Paul Daniels Academy learning to do little more than entertain kids at parties. I fail to see how JKR's generations of Hogwartians have anything useful in their CV's or have anywhere to go once their time has been served at school. Or did I miss JKR's sentence where it's either explained or dismissed? And would a University in the muggle world accept someone with a string of "A Grades" in their OWLs etc? I think not, because the cover would be blown on the wizard world if such qualifications were ever presented to a board. So whatever qualifications the kids get, their career options are somewaht limited, surely? And while I'm being confused, do wizards/witches etc actually live alongside muggles? I'm sure one or two are mentioned. If so, why would they ever want to live there? They can't use magic in front of muggles, so why go to a school to learn about magic if it has to be hidden away from the 'others' for the rest of your life? And if they don't live next door to muggles, and perhaps get to live in some huge parallel secret world which is only accessible via hidden doorways and magical brick walls, why do they have to go to a real train station to get to the magical station and catch the Hogwarts Express? Surely it would all be part of the hidden wizard world? I wish JKR would make her 'thinking' a bit clearer at times. Or maybe it's just me having one of those 'what problem?'moments far too early in the morning? Any great revelations would be gratefully received, I think! Sandra (not sleeping too well) From Lynx412 at AOL.com Sun Apr 17 11:44:27 2005 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 07:44:27 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sept 1 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127651 In a message dated 4/16/2005 12:53:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, steve at hp-lexicon.org writes: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nicole angeles > wrote: > > > >I have a question... why does September 1 always fall on a > >Sunday?? > > > It doesn't. It's just that September 2 always falls on a Monday at > Hogwarts, regardless of what day September 1 falls on. I know that > sounds like I'm saying the same thing, but I'm not. In the Harry > Potter universe, classes always start on a Monday. That's in the > books. However, the books don't say that September 1 is always a > Sunday. Think of it this way: they leave the Muggle world and enter > a magical one when they take the train, and when they get there, the > next day is arbitrarily a Monday. So when they leave, it might be > Thursday in the Muggle world. They arrive, they have a feast, they > go to bed...and it's Monday morning, September 2, and classes start. > > By way of example: In Goblet of Fire, they left Kings Cross on a > Monday. The next day, September 2, was a Monday. > > Hey, it's magic. That's one possible answer, Steve. Personally, I suspect that the WW uses a different calendar. think of all the calendar changes we've gone throught in the Muggle World. I can see the WW, with it's traditionalist ways, not adopting any calendar reforms initiated by Muggles. I would suspect that, given their interest in astronomical data for spells, their calendar may already have been reasonably accurate anyway. If their calendar begins on a day they call Sunday September 1, there is no reason that that day has to match up exactly with the MW's September 1. Also, perhaps the WW has a reason for September 2 to always fall on a Monday. Suppose the day they chose to break from the MW was Sunday September 1, whenever. That day, including the day of the week, might well be the WW's New Year's Day. It might even be calculated much like Easter, to always fall on a specific Sunday. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 11:56:13 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 04:56:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: UnderageMagic/GoodGuys/AdultWizards/Histrionic /Muggleborn/TheDoor/Hooch/Cho In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050417115613.82374.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127652 --- "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Suppose some not yet very well known member of the Order of the > Phoenix makes his debut as a major character by *raping* Hermione > at HQ. And we see Hermione crying on Tonks's shoulder; Tonks is > very shocked and wants to arrest the bloke to be tried for rape by > the Department of Magical Law Enforcement, and Hermione says NO! > Order secrets might be revealed during the investigation and > trial! so Tonks says, at least tell Dumbledore and ask DD to > punish the perpetrator. And eventually Hermione tells DD and DD > tells her he will have a word with the bloke, but asks her if she > can bring herself to keep this event completely secret, because > the bloke is too useful in the fight against Voldemort to expel > him from the Order ... is this bloke a good guy? Well, I really don't think this is a possible (let alone likely) incident in future books. I also think that everyone in the above paragraph is acting in a very uncharacteristic manner. (Dumbledore wouldn't get a chance to talk to the perpetrator because Ron and the twins would have hexed a bludger and hidden it in the perpetrator's home where it would have flattened him into quidditch mud as soon as he stepped into the room, assuming Hermione wouldn't have hexed him herself immediately afterwards. And the Dumbledore who was moved to anger because Umbridge SHOOK one of his students would NOT counsel Hermoine to look the other way about something like this.) But accepting it for the moment: no, someone like that would not be a Good Guy(TM), if only because he was willing to indulge in strictly personal actions at the expense of the Order. There is no reason that benefits the Order or the WW or the fight against Voldemort through the rape of any woman who's a member of it. Anybody this self-indulgent would not be a good Order member anyway, and should be dispensed with ASAP. A more realistic example would be: in his efforts to help the Order as a spy, Snape has to take part in DE activity on occasion or not reveal future DE activity that might save someone's life. Does this mean that he is not a Good Guy(TM)? Like the rapist question, the answer depends on the reasoning: it will benefit the Order in the medium term, and the WW in the long term, if some terrible acts are allowed to unfold in the short term so that Snape's position as a spy is not revealed. Although I would expect Dumbledore to be cagey enough to ensure that the maximum amount of carnage would somehow be prevented in each case. > Some listies think that Snape's daily behavior is closer, on > the scale of badness, to rape than to being unpleasant. Some listies are wrong. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Make Yahoo! your home page http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 12:04:30 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:04:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050417120430.97166.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127653 If we didn't start getting some of the many threads tied up. We need to get some more information about the first Order and the first war, which I think we will, and some of the issues left over from the MWPP past need to be described objectively. It would also be nice if the entire international structure laid out in GOF would appear again, as it disappeared almost entirely except for Krum as letter-writer and Madame Maxine as Hagrid's companion on the trip to the giants. And if the centaurs could take care of Grawp for us in the summer, that would be nice too. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 14:00:30 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 14:00:30 -0000 Subject: UnderageMagic/GoodGuys/AdultWizards/Histrionic /Muggleborn/TheDoor/Hooch/Cho In-Reply-To: <20050417115613.82374.qmail@web53102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127654 Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: Suppose some not yet very well known member of the Order of the Phoenix makes his debut as a major character by *raping* Hermione at HQ. And eventually Hermione tells DD and DD tells her he will have a word with the bloke, but asks her if she can bring herself to keep this event completely secret, because the bloke is too useful in the fight against Voldemort to expel him from the Order ... is this bloke a good guy? Magda: Well, I really don't think this is a possible (let alone likely) > incident in future books. I also think that everyone in the above > paragraph is acting in a very uncharacteristic manner. > But accepting it for the moment: no, someone like that would not be a Good Guy(TM), if only because he was willing to indulge in strictly personal actions at the expense of the Order. There is no reason that benefits the Order or the WW or the fight against Voldemort through the rape of any woman who's a member of it. Anybody this self-indulgent would not be a good Order member anyway, and should be dispensed with ASAP. Alla: Well, I think that Catlady's example was right on target. I don't think that she was trying to analogize everybody's else actions as much as Snape's. You said it yourself - this "hypothetical" order member was willing to indulge in strictly personal actions on expense of the order. Well, that is EXACTLY what I happen to think Snape is doing. I mean, definitely, if you don't think that Snape is really carrying a grudge against James to Harry, then analogy won't work, but otherwise, yes, to me Snape is THAT self-indulgent. Trust between Snape and Harry was essential in OOP, IMO. Trust is not build overnight. All those five years when Snape was making his remarks, translated in OOP in having no trust between two people who REALLY needed to trust each other. Catlady: Some listies think that Snape's daily behavior is closer, on the scale of badness, to rape than to being unpleasant. Magda: Some listies are wrong. Alla: Erm... OK. Just my opinion of course, Alla From periwinklebluebear at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 12:15:01 2005 From: periwinklebluebear at yahoo.com (nicole angeles) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 05:15:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: body... veil... where??? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050417121502.9098.qmail@web53205.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127655 question again... What happened to Sirius' body when he fell behind the black veil??? It has to go somewhere... Where did it go??? I thought the things that are speaking behind the veil are the spirits that decided not to be a ghost, but that means that their bodies are somewhere else, like underground or something... When Sirius' body fell, his body didn't return... Nicole From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 14:55:18 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 07:55:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: UnderageMagic/GoodGuys/AdultWizards/Histrionic /Muggleborn/TheDoor/Hooch/Cho In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050417145518.40284.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127656 > Alla: > > Well, I think that Catlady's example was right on target. I don't > think that she was trying to analogize everybody's else actions as > much as Snape's. You said it yourself - this "hypothetical" order > member was willing to indulge in strictly personal actions on > expense of the order. Well, that is EXACTLY what I happen to think > Snape is doing. I mean, definitely, if you don't think that Snape > is > really carrying a grudge against James to Harry, then analogy won't > work, but otherwise, yes, to me Snape is THAT self-indulgent. I don't think carrying a grudge is the same thing as rape or assault. They are very different things and not at all comparable. Rape and assault are crimes, and carrying a grudge is not. If the hypothetical Order member was refusing to obey orders because he was jealous that Hermione's marks were better than his, then it would be grounds for concern and Dumbledore should step in and deal with it. But it would not mean that the HOM is a Bad Guy(TM), it would just mean that he needed some strong guidance from an objective person who could set him straight. Jealousy is a character flaw, not a crime. And since I think Snape did a better job teaching occlumency than we could have hoped for based on the first four books, I don't blame the grudge for their lack of success. As you say, there was a lot of backstory between Snape and Harry by this time, and Dumbledore should have realized it. As Snape says, "I assure you I did not beg for the job", and there's no reason to think he's lying. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From greatelderone at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 15:33:21 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 15:33:21 -0000 Subject: body... veil... where??? In-Reply-To: <20050417121502.9098.qmail@web53205.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127657 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nicole angeles wrote: > > > question again... > > What happened to Sirius' body when he fell behind the black veil??? It has to go somewhere... Where did it go??? GEO: Probably to the same place where Obi-Wan's and Yoda's bodies went when they became one with the Force and ascended. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 15:48:44 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 15:48:44 -0000 Subject: Snape as one of the Good Guys... again In-Reply-To: <20050417145518.40284.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127658 Alla earlier: Well, I think that Catlady's example was right on target. I don't think that she was trying to analogize everybody's else actions as much as Snape's. You said it yourself - this "hypothetical" order member was willing to indulge in strictly personal actions on expense of the order. Well, that is EXACTLY what I happen to think Snape is doing. I mean, definitely, if you don't think that Snape is really carrying a grudge against James to Harry, then analogy won't work, but otherwise, yes, to me Snape is THAT self-indulgent. Magda: I don't think carrying a grudge is the same thing as rape or assault. They are very different things and not at all comparable. Rape and assault are crimes, and carrying a grudge is not. Alla: Yes, of course, they are not the same things, but again, IMO it works on "analogy" level, not on the literal level of comparison. In your earlier post you were arguing that being on the side of Dumbledore is the only "good" that counts in the large sense, correct? So, no matter what Order members or whoever fight Voldemort do while they don't fight Voldemort directly, they are still the good guys, correct? If I am misrepresenting your argument, please correct me. Now, Catlady gave a very good hypothetical of the act, which hypothetical order member commits, while NOT fighting Voldemort directly. Whether in the "METAPHORICAL" sense Snape actions could be analogysed to rape, I am not sure, but I am not directly opposed to that analogy. Magda: If the hypothetical Order member was refusing to obey orders because he was jealous that Hermione's marks were better than his, then it would be grounds for concern and Dumbledore should step in and deal with it. But it would not mean that the HOM is a Bad Guy(TM), it would just mean that he needed some strong guidance from an objective person who could set him straight. Jealousy is a character flaw, not a crime. Alla: Well, who says that bad guys do not need counsel, unless they are totally lost to the Dark and don't accept any counsel? I think this is a very good example, actually. I would only add to this example that such hypothetical order member would do his/her best to sabotage Hermione's marks somehow. Magda: And since I think Snape did a better job teaching occlumency than we could have hoped for based on the first four books, I don't blame the grudge for their lack of success. As you say, there was a lot of backstory between Snape and Harry by this time, and Dumbledore should have realized it. As Snape says, "I assure you I did not beg for the job", and there's no reason to think he's lying. Alla: But such backstory, the lack of trust,etc was totally created by Snape ( IMO only), so yes, I think that the fact that he let his personal feelings interfere with professional ones for five years with Dumbledore turning a blind eye to it of course hurt their cause tremendously. To make a long story short - my SPECULATIVE conclusion of my highly speculative post is that Snape's not being NICE to Harry for five years hurt the side of GOOD in a major way. My opinion only, Alla. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 16:06:46 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 09:06:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape as one of the Good Guys... again In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050417160646.56883.qmail@web53109.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127659 > Alla: > > Yes, of course, they are not the same things, but again, IMO it > works on "analogy" level, not on the literal level of comparison. Since an analogy is a comparison, I'm not sure what this sentence means. > In your earlier post you were arguing that being on the side of > Dumbledore is the only "good" that counts in the large sense, > correct? > > So, no matter what Order members or whoever fight Voldemort do > while > they don't fight Voldemort directly, they are still the good guys, > correct? If I am misrepresenting your argument, please correct me. This is not at all what I said in my second post - I said that if an Order member raped someone, he would NOT be a good guy. > Whether in the "METAPHORICAL" sense Snape actions could be > analogysed to rape, I am not sure, but I am not directly opposed to > that analogy. What other sense is there for an analogy? For an effective comparison, the two acts should be - on some level - of equal weight and importance. Otherwise you can keep extending the horizons until you're equating the Holocaust with raiding the cookie jar. > My opinion only, > > Alla. Yes, and it's my opinion that I gave in my posts on the topic. If you disagree with it, fine. Magda __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 17 16:24:09 2005 From: theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net (theotokos) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 09:24:09 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050417162409.90115.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127660 > Theotokos wrote > So, to re-ask Julie's question: Does the British edition us "Jr." >in the text or was that an American addition? Karen: Julie's original question was not 'Does the British edition use "J"?', it was: [When Harry left the prefects bathroom with the egg, he saw "Bartoimaeus Crouch" in Snape's office. Why did the name not show up as "Bartimaeus Crouch, Jr."?] Presumably this means that "Jr" was not in the American edition either - if they had approached JRK about changing this, she would have had to have said "No" because it would have blown her 'mistaken identity' plot out of the water. So, in answer to your question, no it was not in the original British text, neither does it seem to have been added to the American text. Theotokos (again): Sorry for the confusion. What I meant by "re-ask" is to re-phrase. I meant to broaden the question to ask if she used B. Crouch, Jr. in any other context or conversation in the book. I realize she could not have used Jr. in the map. I just thought somewhere in the US version Junior had be used in referring to Barty the younger. I must have assumed it--categorized his "junior" standing as it is common place to do in America. Theotokos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 17:02:21 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 17:02:21 -0000 Subject: Snape as one of the Good Guys... again/ some linguistics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127662 Alla earlier: Yes, of course, they are not the same things, but again, IMO it works on "analogy" level, not on the literal level of comparison. Magda: Since an analogy is a comparison, I'm not sure what this sentence means. Alla: Let me see if I can clarify then. >From Webster dictionary on line: Comparison: Main Entry: com?par?i?son Pronunciation: k&m-'par-&-s&n Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French comparaison, from Latin comparation-, comparatio, from comparare 1 : the act or process of comparing : as a : the representing of one thing or person as similar to or like another b : an examination of two or more items to establish similarities and dissimilarities 2 : identity of features : SIMILARITY 3 : the modification of an adjective or adverb to denote different levels of quality, quantity, or relation . >From Webster dictionary on-line: > Main Entry: anal?o?gy > Pronunciation: &-'na-l&-jE > Function: noun > Inflected Form(s): plural -gies > 1 : inference that if two or more things agree with one another in > some respects they will prob. agree in others > 2 a : resemblance in some particulars between things otherwise > unlike : SIMILARITY b : comparison based on such resemblance > 3 : correspondence between the members of pairs or sets of > linguistic forms that serves as a basis for the creation of another > form > 4 : correspondence in function between anatomical parts of different > structure and origin -- compare HOMOLOGY > synonym see LIKENESS I think what I had in mind was 2a meaning for analogy - "resemblance in some particulars between thing otherwise unlike" Have I managed to confuse you even more? :-) Sorry, to make a long story short, when I argue legal point sometimes - I can find the case, which supports my position by 'analogy', even if FACTS of such case are different, I am still trying to find similarities,which can help me. So, here I suppose what is similar to me is not necessarily the ACT, but what goes with it - humiliation and hurt and having your teacher as something your boggart transforms into. Alla earlier: Whether in the "METAPHORICAL" sense Snape actions could be analogysed to rape, I am not sure, but I am not directly opposed to that analogy. Magda: What other sense is there for an analogy? For an effective comparison, the two acts should be - on some level - of equal weight and importance. Otherwise you can keep extending the horizons until you're equating the Holocaust with raiding the cookie jar. Alla: Well, yes I believe that on SOME level what Snape does to Harry and Neville is just as horrible. Constant humiliation, not only in front of the class but in front of the colleagues? I actually think that JKR shows us what tremendous negative power words and words alone can have over one's soul. Ginny was hurt by the power of word after all. JMO, Alla From sherriola at earthlink.net Sun Apr 17 17:43:51 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 10:43:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] What's the point of Hogwarts? Message-ID: <12652202.1113759832155.JavaMail.root@gonzo.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127663 I was wondering what Harry etc are supposed to do when they leave Hogwarts? I know some careers are mentioned, but they're vague or general, and as far as I can tell, the curriculum at Hogwarts doesn't cater for any genuine ones. As I see it, the students either go back to the muggle world where magic is strictly controlled or forbidden and so they therefore have no useful qualifications at all, or they go into the 'parallel' world where all the countless other witches and wizards live (wherever that is), to make a living doing what, exactly? All they learn at Hogwarts are party tricks, eg say a latin word and turn one thing into something else, or levitate something, or make a peculiar potion, and so on. That's all very clever, but what's the point? In the muggle world that would mean they could set up a phenomenally profitable manufacturing business where they cast spells to turn rubbish into something valuable to flog to muggles, or perhaps run highly efficient removal services by levitating heavy objects to nearby dumps... but isn't that kind of thing forbidden? So in the wizard world there would be thousands of students every year all with the same general knowledge of magic that's hardly going to set them up in a career. After all, if you have so much magic at your fingertips, why would you need to go on and study a dull university subject and then get a mundane career? So my question is how do they make a living in the adult world, bearing in my they've spent seven years at The Paul Daniels Academy learning to do little more than entertain kids at parties. I fail to see how JKR's generations of Hogwartians have anything useful in their CV's or have anywhere to go once their time has been served at school. Or did I miss JKR's sentence where it's either explained or dismissed? And would a University in the muggle world accept someone with a string of "A Grades" in their OWLs etc? I think not, because the cover would be blown on the wizard world if such qualifications were ever presented to a board. So whatever qualifications the kids get, their career options are somewaht limited, surely? And while I'm being confused, do wizards/witches etc actually live alongside muggles? I'm sure one or two are mentioned. If so, why would they ever want to live there? They can't use magic in front of muggles, so why go to a school to learn about magic if it has to be hidden away from the 'others' for the rest of your life? And if they don't live next door to muggles, and perhaps get to live in some huge parallel secret world which is only accessible via hidden doorways and magical brick walls, why do they have to go to a real train station to get to the magical station and catch the Hogwarts Express? Surely it would all be part of the hidden wizard world? I wish JKR would make her 'thinking' a bit clearer at times. Or maybe it's just me having one of those 'what problem?'moments far too early in the morning? Any great revelations would be gratefully received, I think! Sherry now We know from OOTP, that to become an auror, harry would have to undergo three more years of intensive and specialized training. I assume it's the same for other careers in the wizarding world. I associate hogwarts with middle school through high school, and then the students go on to other training for careers. Or they do things like drive the knight bus, which probably doesn't need post Hogwarts training. Sherry From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Sun Apr 17 17:55:10 2005 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 13:55:10 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] What's the point of Hogwarts? Message-ID: <67.4307d919.2f93fcfe@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127664 I think the school's purpose is to teach the kids to control their magic. It's probably dangerous for a wizard to be untrained. They might use it unintentionally. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sherriola at earthlink.net Sun Apr 17 17:58:49 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 10:58:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] What would disappoint you about HBP? Message-ID: <26863993.1113760729809.JavaMail.root@gonzo.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127665 lupinlore asked what would dissappoint us if it did or did not happen in the next books. Here's my list. 1. Harry dying would disappoint me very much. there's nothing that would make the death of a 17-year-old boy seem right or justified to me. 2. The death of Ron, Hermione, Lupin or Ginny. 3. Lupin being shown to truly be ESE. and on the subject of Lupin, i would be very disappointed if we didn't see more of him, and if he didn't step in and become the paternal figure in harry's life. 4. not learning more about the marauders, including the so-called prank and Snape's worst memory in some objective fashion. 4. Having it all turn out to be a dream would be beyond a disappointment. It would be disgusting, and i'd never read any future books by JKR, in spite of the fact that she is a very good writer and can sure spin a tale. i'd feel very cheated. 5. Not having Voldemort defeated in some way, though I don't exactly see Harry pulling out his wand and performing the killing curse. 6. I'd like to learn about the ships, at least as far as they end up for kids of that age, or in the final where-they-all-went chapter. And I agree with Lupinlore, i'd be seriously disappointed to have much more air time wasted on Grawp! What a total disappointment he was, especially keeping us from seeing ron's big moment in Quidditch! Sherry From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Sun Apr 17 18:20:25 2005 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 14:20:25 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: UnderageMagic/GoodGuys/AdultWizards/Histrionic /Muggl... Message-ID: <6b.4361249a.2f9402e9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127666 In a message dated 4/17/2005 10:57:03 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, mgrantwich at yahoo.com writes: I don't think carrying a grudge is the same thing as rape or assault. They are very different things and not at all comparable. Rape and assault are crimes, and carrying a grudge is not. Whoever said that wasn't comparing rape and assault. They were comparing the self-centeredness of hurting the order by hurting one of it's members through rape with the self-centeredness of hurting the order by hurting one of it's members though psychological torment. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Apr 17 18:39:45 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 18:39:45 -0000 Subject: Regulus' death (was Re: Constellations reveal HBP) In-Reply-To: <20050416150002.40143.qmail@web86708.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127667 > > Fitzov: > > The date of his death coinciding with Harry's birth is too great > > a coincidence to ignore. snip Potioncat Fitzov > In the chapter title: 'The Most Noble and Most Ancient House of Black': "Sirius jabbed a finger at the very bottom of the tree, at the name 'Regulus Black'. A date of death (some 15 years previously) followed the date of birth." Potioncat: Oh, OK, I thought you were saying Regulus died on the day Harry was born. But to be honest, I've never picked up on the fact that he died within a few months of Harry's birth. So the prophesy, Regulus' death, the birth of Neville and Harry and possibly Snapes' return all happened about the same time. (Of course, I guess several other kids in Harry's class were born around then too... Good point. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 19:11:44 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 19:11:44 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127668 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > ...edited... > > I was wondering what Harry etc are supposed to do when they > leave Hogwarts? I know some careers are mentioned, but > they're vague or general, and as far as I can tell, the curriculum > at Hogwarts doesn't cater for any genuine ones. bboyminn: First, when it comes to jobs, I think it's important to look below the surface. Once you do, you will see that there are many more jobs than it first appears. For example, the wizard world has books, that means it also has authors, publishers, paper makers, printers, and book binders, as well as all the people necesary to support the warehousing and distribution of books. As another example, look at Fortescue's Ice Cream Shop and consider all the support businesses he needs to set it up and keep it going. He needs cups, bowls, spoon, store fixtures, table and chairs, fruit and fruit toppings, as well as other flavors and toppings, and milk. That means there has to be cabinet makers, silver smiths, furniture makers, makers of equipment to create a fully stocked kitchen, cold storage cupboards and freezers, farmers, import/export, and the list goes on. All these things are probably created and made to work by magic, but none the less cabinets, furniture, and cold storage cupboards do need to be created somehow. Further, the presents of this second tier of support businesses implies a third tier to support them. If there are cabinets makers and other craftsmen, then there must be lumberjacks and sawmills to gather and process the wood. > Sandra continues: > > ...edited... > > In the muggle world that would mean they could set up a > phenomenally profitable manufacturing business where they > cast spells to turn rubbish into something valuable to flog to > muggles, or perhaps run highly efficient removal services by > levitating heavy objects to nearby dumps... but isn't that kind > of thing forbidden? bboyminn: Keep in mind that you are not forbidden from doing these things you suggest, you are only forbidden from getting caught by muggles. Certainly a talented magical cabinet maker or other manufacturer could turn raw material into finished product with ease using magic, and nothing would really stop that person from selling the final products in the muggle world. That assumes of course that the final product, while created with magic, does not itself have any unnatural magical powers or characteristics. > Sandra continues: > > ...edited... > > So my question is how do they make a living in the adult world, > bearing in my they've spent seven years at The Paul Daniels > Academy learning to do little more than entertain kids at parties. > I fail to see how JKR's generations of Hogwartians have anything > useful ...edited... > bboyminn: Why couldn't Dean and Seamus use Dean's artistic ability to start an advertising business? We have seen the existance of several magazines and newspapers, those periodicals need to make money therefore they need advertising, therefore the world needs advertising agencies to create the themes and adcopy. I envision Deam Thomas creating adcopy that is similar to the cartoon/comicstrips we see in the Sunday paper. Only instead of the short message/story playing out over several still frames, his play out like short animations within a single frame on the printed page. Neville could start an enchanted herb farm. All the herb, and rare and uncommon ingredients for potions have to come from somewhere. Why not from Neville? > Sandra continues: > > And would a University in the muggle world accept someone with a > string of "A Grades" in their OWLs etc? I think not, because > the cover would be blown on the wizard world if such > qualifications were ever presented to a board. So whatever > qualifications the kids get, their career options are somewaht > limited, surely? > bboyminn: Well, this is definitely a problem. I can see magical kids wanting to go on in life and make their fortunes in the muggle world, and since muggle's use technology rather than magic, they would probably need a more formal muggle education. While it would be difficult for a muggle to get into the university, I don't think it would be impossible. I suspect if you could demonstrate a reasonable aptitude and proficiency at English and basic Math, it might still be possible. Further, if you were a muggle-born like Hermione, and you knew in advance you had an interest in pursuing a future in the muggle world, there really wouldn't be anything to stop you from taking the G.C.S.E. (O-Level, A-Level) exams, and getting the required qualifications. As long as we are on the subject of education after Hogwarts, we already know that Auror training includes an additional three years of specialized training (I think it was 3). Reasonably to become a wand maker or Healer, you would go through a similar period of specialized training. We could view these as similar to apprenticeship training. One could even view Percy's job as personal assistant to various Ministers and Department Heads as representing his apprenticeship into the workings of the Ministry at the administrative level. > Sandra continues: > > And while I'm being confused, do wizards/witches etc actually > live alongside muggles? bboyminn: First, we know that Moody and the Black family live right in London. The Black house is right next door to common muggle houses, although admittedly hidden from view. Dedalus Diggle lives in Kent. The Malfoys have a fine manor in Wiltshire. The Weasleys, Diggorys, and the Fawcetts all live within (very long) walking distance of Ottery St. Catchpole, which by all impressions is a muggle village. Further, Mrs. Weasley has visited the post office in Ottery St. Catchpole to phone for three taxis which then picked them up at the Burrow and took them to London (probably cost a small fortune). Note that at a later date, she also bought postage and mailed a letter presumably at this same post office. So, the answer is yes, aside from the residents of Hogsmead, magical people do live among the muggles. But consider this, magic people don't have to commute; they don't need automobiles, they don't need to take public transportation. Indeed once the enter the front door, they never have to leave their house again, at least not to the knowledge of the neighbors. They can Floo or Apparate to where ever they need to go. Consequently, there would never be any need or that many opportunities to interact with the neighbors. Further, without going to the extremes of the Black house, they could use minor enchantments, like an Apathy Charm, to make there home so thoroughly dull, boring, and uninteresting that the neighboring muggles, while being able to see the 'magic' house, would generally ignore it. I suspect the Weasleys have used some minor charm like this. There house can be found by the muggle taxi drivers, but at the same time, is generally ignored by most other people. > Sandra continues: > > ... perhaps get to live in some huge parallel secret world which is > only accessible via hidden doorways and magical brick walls, why do > they have to go to a real train station to get to the magical > station and catch the Hogwarts Express? Surely it would all be part > of the hidden wizard world? > bboyminn: First, JKR has said that Hogsmead is the only ALL wizard village in the UK, so in general, that somewhat eliminates other hidden /parallel world/ neighborhoods and villages. But in my own little fantasy world of Harry Potter, I suspect that other major cities have small hidden areas like Diagon Alley. Perhaps not as big, more like a small secret garden courtyard with a few small shops, including perhaps a pub and a tea shop. Further in my own late night dillusions, I picture wizards moving into very small muggle neighborhoods and gradually taking over. 'Birds of a feather, flock together.' This is not that uncommon. Someone of a particular ethinc background moves into a neighborhood, especially into less desirable neighborhoods. Soon, the cousin moves in next door to them, then their mother-in-law moves in down the block. Next thing you know you've got Little Saigon or Chinatown. With this unique ethnic group comes specialized businesses to support the available customer base, which means Chinese restaurants and Chinese markets. Which in turn means, if we are talking about wizards, a wizard safe and friendly tea shop, a wizard safe and friendly cafe, a wizard market and pub. Since these were all previously muggle houses and shops, they can't be hidden to the extent that the Black house or Diagon Alley are hidden. I think the taxman might be a little suspicious if a whole neighborhood that has been on the tax roles for centuries, suddenly vanished from the face of the earth. But these minor enchantments I mentioned would be enough to make muggles ignore the houses and shops. For example, a muggle and magic tea shop could be right next door to each other, but to muggles the magic tea shop would be so dull boring and uninteresting, that no muggle would ever think of going in there. In this vein, we also see the possiblity for another area of jobs. I suspect many muggle-born or muggle-married magical people create a niche of jobs helping wizards interact with the muggle world. Mr. Weasley owns the land where his house is; a house, a long drive, pond, paddock, orchards, woods, etc. He had to buy that land somehow. Since the muggle taxis can find it, it's clearly not magical enchanted land. I suspect there are Solicitors (lawyers) and Real Estate Agents who help wizard deal with things like this. Further, I have always speculated that there is a special type of Import/Export business that helps deal with importing and exporting between the magical and muggle world. Mr. Fortescue needs strawberries for his ice cream. While there could be magical strawberry farmers, it's entirely possible that a wizard may have married a muggle who took over her father's produce market. Now while she still services the local neighborhood with fresh produce, out the backdoor, she funnels strawberrys into Fortescue's shop. Of course, anything traveling from the magical world into the muggle world while created with magic, in order to be legal, can't have any actual magical properties of its own. > Sandra concludes: > > I wish JKR would make her 'thinking' a bit clearer at times. Or > maybe it's just me having one of those 'what problem?'moments far > too early in the morning? Any great revelations would be > gratefully received, I think! > > Sandra bboyminn: >From my perspective, when I encounter inconsistencies in the story, rather than dwell on the inconsistency, I find it much more fun to assume that it is in fact correct, and then speculate on the possible explanations as to why it is correct. In otherword, in the face of doubt, I make it up; a very enjoyable pursuit. Steve/bboyminn From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sun Apr 17 19:26:15 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 19:26:15 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127669 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > I saw this question on another site and thought I'd try it out here. > What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? My > list includes: I totally agree with your list. My list would include: 1. Snape getting taken down a peg or two. I really hate Snape. 2. Dumbledore going back to the character I loved and respected before OOTP. The man who trusted Harry and believed he wasn't a fragile egg to be protected at all costs is someone that I miss. 3. A lot more of Luna. I really liked Luna and I saw some sparks between her and Harry in the end of the book. I would like to see that explored further. But if not, pretty much anything with luna would make me happy. especially if she shows Hermione up while doing it. 4. I would like to see more of Susan Bones. I think there is a cool character lurking in her and she has the best last name ever! 5. If ginny is going to be as important as she seems like she's going to be then I would actually like to see her character do something cool instead of just constantly being told that she was cool by other characters. Or better yet, just a fading of her character's importance. She really annoyed me in OOTP. Worst characterization ever! 6. No H/G!!!! 7. Neville standing up to Snape. Maybe even Snape respecting that a little (unless snape is evil. Then I want to see Neville kick the crap out of him). 8. The thing that I most want to see Harry happy. I want a year where Harry isn't helplessly watching as stuff piles up on him while he has no recourse. I want an acknowledgement that Harry has done and seen more than in a few years than most witches and wizards will ever see in their entire lives and I want that reflected in the way adults treat him. Nothing upset me more in ootp than when Harry was being treated like he was an ordinary teenager when he is anything but. phoenixgod2000, who thinks he is going to be seeing very few of his wishes in the next book. *sigh* From kempermentor at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 20:15:14 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 20:15:14 -0000 Subject: Life was Re: Behind the Locked Door...Self Sacrifice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chys Sage Lattes" wrote: > > > > Kemper: > > What if the Locked Door holds Life? It's locked not to keep others > > out but to keep it in, because where Death draws in, Life explodes > > out. > > > > > > > > > Chys: Are you saying it's something like Pandora's box then? Hope perhaps? I > don't get it, Voldie WANTS life so why would he be repulsed by it > being so great in Harry? (Aside from the fact he hasn't been able to > kill him yet...) Kemper now: I don't think Voldie WANTS life. I think he doesn't want death. He fears death which is not the same as embracing life. Those who embrace life seem less afraid of dying. To fully embrace life means to accept all that it is to be alive: Grief, Love, Anger, Disappointment, Extacy, Joy, Lust, etc. Harry, as he is written, seems more full of life than full of love. So, when Voldie goes to possess him, Voldie runs away because he is afraid or doesn't understand what it is to live. Only supposing. Kemper From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Apr 17 20:39:51 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 20:39:51 -0000 Subject: Sept 1 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127671 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lynx412 at A... wrote: > In a message dated 4/16/2005 12:53:53 AM Eastern Standard Time, > steve at h... writes: The Other Cheryl: > If their calendar begins on a day they call > Sunday September 1, there is no reason that that day has to match up exactly > with the MW's September 1. > > Also, perhaps the WW has a reason for September 2 to always fall on a > Monday. Suppose the day they chose to break from the MW was Sunday September > 1, whenever. That day, including the day of the week, might well be the WW's > New Year's Day. It might even be calculated much like Easter, to always fall on > a specific Sunday. Geoff: The only problem with that might be where pupils, like Hermione or Colin, come from a Muggle background; non-corresponding dates could lead to confusion. We do know that there is definitely a correlation between the real world and the wizarding world when Harry takes the Hogwarts Express for the first time on September 1, 1991, which was a Sunday. I wonder if we're trying to read too much into this. Having got the day right for the first book, Jo Rowling may just not have looked at this particular aspect of things in subsequent books. One of my favourite books is "To serve them all my days" by R.F.Delderfield which is about a schoolmaster in the 1920s and 1930s and the author gets his knickers in a twist all through the book with information about dates and times. I just shrug my shoulders and battle on.... From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Apr 17 20:51:37 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 20:51:37 -0000 Subject: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire In-Reply-To: <20050417162409.90115.qmail@web81607.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127672 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, theotokos wrote: > Theotokos: > > Sorry for the confusion. What I meant by "re-ask" is to re- phrase. I meant to broaden the question to ask if she used B. Crouch, Jr. in any other context or conversation in the book. I realize she could not have used Jr. in the map. I just thought somewhere in the US version Junior had be used in referring to Barty the younger. I must have assumed it--categorized his "junior" standing as it is common place to do in America. Geoff: In most places, only one of the Crouch family is being discussed and so the context indicates which one is involved. The only place, I think, where there is extensive reference to both simultaneously is in the chapter "Padfoot Returns" where Sirius is talking to Harry and the others about the way in which Crouch (Senior) treated Crouch (Junior) and is most cases, he refers to the latter as "the boy" or "his son". Up to that point, we are not aware of his son's existence. In the courtroom scene in "The Pensieve", BCj's name is not actually mentioned. From sam2sar at charter.net Sun Apr 17 21:12:59 2005 From: sam2sar at charter.net (sam2sar) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 21:12:59 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127673 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ebennet68" wrote: > > 4. One last thing for now, all of the heroines had happy endings. > Could that be the same thing for Harry? We shall see. > Sam says: I have not read Jane Austen but I have read the Little White Horse and it to has a happy ending with all the lose ends tied up. Everyone was pared with the right person, long lost loves together and the such. It was the only part of the book that I didn't like. Sam2Sar From willsonkmom at msn.com Sun Apr 17 22:03:50 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 22:03:50 -0000 Subject: Disapointed in Potter? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127674 Potioncat steps into the room. She is known throughout HPfGU-lists for her compassion, patience and sense of humor, always the respectful poster in disagreements and discussions. She looks around, takes a deep breath and screams at the top of her lungs, "I've had it! If you are so sure you're going to be disappointed to tears, go read a different book! Join a different group. There are over 600 book discussion groups on Yahoo alone (I just typed book discussions in the yahoo search bar and counted them.) Or stay on this list, but if you can't say something nice, or something connected to canon, don't say anything at all." Potioncat looks at the faces. Some shocked, some angry, some nodding in agreement. She thinks that maybe she forgot to take her Wolfsbane Potion this morning. Oh well, another reputation ruined. From 5682574 at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 17 12:36:34 2005 From: 5682574 at sbcglobal.net (Pat) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 12:36:34 -0000 Subject: HP Conventional Wisdom Watch II In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127675 > Lupinlore wrote: > > ALBUS DUMBLEDORE - Some feel he owes Harry a long talk > > and a big apology, or at least expressions of deep regret for > > what his decisions have put Harry through. He is the > > only one Voldemort fears, yet traditional patterns of > > literature seem to mark him for death fairly soon. Stay tuned. > > Julie: > When I read OoTP, I perceived his regret during > his apology to Harry to be genuine and heartfelt. > > I do agree that the traditional pattern of literature probably > marks DD for death. But perhaps JKR will divert from this pattern. Pat: Dumbledore did apologize and explain to Harry at the end of OOTP, and told him he cares about him too much. So I think we will see Dumbledore explain more, and work more closely with Harry in HBP as a mentor. Dumbledore is known for his work in alchemy, and we've heard nothing about that. I think we'll see him mentor Harry in alchemy. From JKR saying Harry will leave Privet Drive early, and the Scholastic book cover, I think Dumbledore may work with Harry during the summer. As far as indications that Dumbledore will die in book 6 or 7, there may be literature trends that indicate he will die, but as far as the books JKR has said influenced her writing, the indication would be that he lives to see Harry live happily ever after. Well, maybe he'll die of old age after Harry has succeeded, but the books on JKR's bookshelf (on her website) show no precedent for him to die, or for Harry to fail either. She does like to put her own twist on things, so never say never, but I doubt it. From 5682574 at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 17 12:46:38 2005 From: 5682574 at sbcglobal.net (Pat) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 12:46:38 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127676 ~rockstar064 wrote: > Maybe the destroying of the wand is just a ceremonial kind of > practice during expulsion; you know, to seal the deal. I just > hope Harry is careful; we know now that Harry needs to keep > the wand he has, and destruction of his wand would be > detrimental. > > I can't remember; do they destroy the wands for any other > crimes? Do they destroy wands before sending someone to Azkaban? Pat: Hagrid was expelled, and sent to Azkaban, and he was still using his snapped wand inside his umbrella in book 1. I don't see why he doesn't get another one. Maybe he has, and she just never mentioned it. Do we see him using a wand instead of an umbrella? He doesn't need one for CMC classes, so little opportunity to see what he uses. Also, JKR likes to trick us into looking in the wrong direction. So maybe since we all think nothing must happen to Harry's wand because it has a special connection to Voldemort's wand, maybe the opposite is true, and he'll have to use another wand to vanquish Voldemort. From katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 17 14:53:58 2005 From: katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk (Katrina) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 14:53:58 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127677 Right here goes, I think I might be unpopular after this and I accept that I have little right to criticise as I am a student and not an author but... I thought that Sirius's death was lame. -Pause while you gasp with shock- I mean he was Harry's mentor/surrogate father/best friend and a key character (I thought) for the future books and instead of dying bravely in battle he falls through a doorway! I can hypothesise that JK may have been trying to demonstrate the frailty of life or how the dead are still close to us. But I feel that it could have been expressed in a more dramatic and fitting way. I mean, what's next? Harry dying due to a heavy sneeze? Neville being killed by a cactus? Dumbledore swallowing a fatal Arsenic flavour Every Flavour Bean? "Katrina" From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Sun Apr 17 15:54:28 2005 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 15:54:28 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127678 "lupinlore" : > What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? > My list includes: > > 1) Harry recovering too quickly and easily from the various > things that have happened. Also Harry forgiving various people > for various things too easily. Marianne: Although it would disappoint me, too, I wouldn't be surprised, if this is exactly what happens. Until the appearance of CAPLOCKS! HARRY, he'd always shown an amazing resiliency to the disturbances in his life. I had the sneaking feeling that JKR already sent Harry through an abbreviated version of the stages of grief at the end of OoP with regards to Sirius' death. He showed denial when struggling with Remus in front of the veil, anger when exploding in DD's office, bargaining with the idea that he could deal with the death if Sirius would come back as a ghost. And, that walk from the train station seemed to symbolize an acceptance of the position of leadership, and in having to go forward to face the future. I'm missing the fourth stage here (I always forget that one!) Lupinlore: > 5) Having yet ANOTHER "I trust Severus Snape" moment in > Dumbledore's office (or anywhere else, for that matter). Marianne: Adding on to that thought, not getting an explanation of exactly why Snape was a follower of Voldy, and why he changed sides. I'd like to see a further expansion of the involvement of goblins, especially as that could give us more of Bill Weasley. It would disappoint me if whatever deaths may occur in the last two books are predominantly minor characters. I think that if JKR wants to bring home the true horror of Voldemort, she can't rely on people talking about how bad it was the first time around. She has to kill off additional high-profile characters and not be content to decimate the ranks of people we know only by virtue of their names popping up in passing. Marianne From mfterman at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 16:46:05 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 16:46:05 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127679 Well, the wizarding world isn't exceptionally well constructed, but you have to realize that Fred and George are more typical for a Hogwarts gradute. They went into the wizarding world producing goods for sale. Ollivander is another example. When you realize that Muggle industrial mass production techniques don't work (at least probably don't), everything on some level has to be handmade. People graduating from Hogwarts are apprenticed to a more experienced artisan who will teach them the spells and physical skills needed for their chosen profession. Back before World War II, most people didn't go to college, they went straight into a profession after school. And for that matter, back in the middle ages, they usually didn't go straight into school at all but straight into their apprenticeship. There are still a bunch of questions, but in general I assume that the bulk of wizards in the wizarding world are artisans and possibly farmers of various sorts, as befits a more medieval society. "mfterman" From lealess at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 17:40:45 2005 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 17:40:45 -0000 Subject: Snape as one of the Good Guys... analogies In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127680 > Alla earlier: > Whether in the "METAPHORICAL" sense Snape actions could be > analogysed to rape, I am not sure, but I am not directly > opposed to that analogy. > > Magda: > What other sense is there for an analogy? For an effective > comparison, the two acts should be - on some level - of equal > weight and importance. Otherwise you can keep extending the > horizons until you're equating the Holocaust with raiding the > cookie jar. Since the topic is sexually violent analogies, here is another: where I live, if a sexual predator is released from the hospital/prison in which he was confined, the community is notified of his presence in their locality. Whether this is right or wrong, the assumption is that the predator always remains a danger, one of which people need to be aware. How is a werewolf different from this? Much as I love Lupin, when he fails to take his behavior-dampening drug, he has no control over a certain highly destructive aspect of his personality. Dumbledore gives second chances, and causes the condition of Lupin, a potentially dangerous predator, to be hidden from the community. Lupin subsequently became a hazard to students and staff, through failure to take his wolfsbane, even though it was carried to him by Snape. (Certainly, everyone was in an emotionally stressful situation at the time, but Lupin may get to use that as an excuse for his behavior where others wouldn't be afforded that same excuse.) Going further with this analogy, the effects of contact with a sexual predator can last a lifetime. Presumably, then, someone almost made a victim of a werewolf could be traumatized for a very long time. Finally, sexual predators have been known to make their victims complicit in their activities, i.e., recruiting other children for the predator, perhaps even becoming a predator as if it was inevitability. And a person bitten by a werewolf would presumably become a werewolf My point is, analogizing Lupin to a sexual predator, shouldn't the community have been notified of the potential danger, so it could at least take steps to protect the students? But of course, that would make Lupin unemployable, at least around children. The problem I have with some analogies is one of scale. Rape is a crime which seeks to destroy the core identity of the person attacked, is a violation of the person as much as anything else (it seems to me). Can we really say that is Snape's intent? I know some will, but I do not see the evidence. And Lupin can be a dangerous predator at certain times of the month, but overall, he does not want to make other people his victims. Keeping in mind that we see the class through Harry's eyes and through incidents which involve Harry and his friends, I wonder if anyone has ever told Snape that he is abusive to children? Shouldn't this be Dumbledore's responsibility, assuming he knows everything and is on the side of nice (and good)? What is his responsibility to children, bringing a recidivist werewolf on the grounds of Hogwarts? As the list of potentially dangerous creatures being given second chances grows (and includes Buckbeak, Grawp, Firenze, Hagrid?, Moody?), as well as the list of people stuck in childhood dilemmas, it becomes obvious that, at least, the childcare standards in the WW aredifferent from ours. One has to wonder how resilient wizard children are, physically and emotionally. lealess From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 17:53:41 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 17:53:41 -0000 Subject: What would dissapoint you about HBP? -- Grawp Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127681 Lupinlore asked: >> 7) Seeing a great deal of Grawp. >> Oh yes. I truly hated that whole section. Even Hagrid with the giants was a strain for me. What was the purpose of all that, except to have Grawp drip blood on the kids so the thestrals would come? One would have to hope that they play some part in the future books that would be a whole lot easier to digest. The idea of having to read about them again is not pleasant, but maybe there will be something more interesting happen. I hope, I hope, I hope. What was JKR's purpose in putting Grawp in the book? I know JKR said he would be back and would be much better behaved. Oh dear! Bonnie (maybe I'm prejudiced against giants) From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 17 18:38:42 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 18:38:42 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: <67.4307d919.2f93fcfe@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127682 ReturnOfTheMutt at a... wrote: > I think the school's purpose is to teach the kids to control > their magic. It's probably dangerous for a wizard to be > untrained. They might use it unintentionally. Thanks for the reply, but I'm still in the dark. They might learn how to control their magic, but what can they actually do for the rest of their lives? They can only go to wizard-related universities, work in wizard-related industries in the wizard-world... because if they live in the muggle world, all the years of magic-training is worthless. I just think JKR has created a poorly thought out world, that's all. Sandra From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 17 18:47:03 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 18:47:03 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Sherry. In-Reply-To: <12652202.1113759832155.JavaMail.root@gonzo.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127683 Sherry wrote: > We know from OOTP, that to become an auror, Harry would have to undergo three more years of intensive and specialized training. I assume it's the same for other careers in the wizarding world. I associate Hogwarts with middle school through high school, and then the students go on to other training for careers. Or they do things like drive the knight bus, which probably doesn't need post Hogwarts training. < Thanks Sherry! But that kind of emphasises my point in that the kids are very limited in what they can do in life. Wizards and witches don't seem to live in places with muggles, and the exams etc are useless in a muggle world anyway, so any careers and livelihoods have to be in the wizarding world - but to do what? They learn what all the other magical ones learn, and it all seems so pointless. I'm amazed that JKR hasn't tried to give a little credibility or purpose to the reason Hogwarts exists. It just dawned on me that the call-up from Hogwarts to the 11 year olds is hardly a real priviledge, is it? It's like narrowing their life path somewhat. I think. Sandra From bree4378 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 17 19:37:05 2005 From: bree4378 at yahoo.com (Sabrina) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 19:37:05 -0000 Subject: Why Snape Hates Neville Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127684 mfterman wrote: What makes Snape's treatment of Neville so interesting is that Snape almost certainly has to know about what happened to Neville's parents. That they were tortured into madness by Death Eaters. Given that Snape is a reformed Death Eater (theoretically), there's the question of why Snape would be cruel to someone who has suffered so much at the hands of Death Eaters. If Snape was the person to switch sides, he's not totally without a conscience. My own feeling is that Snape has been trying to push Neville to reach his potential. All of the indications in the series have been that Neville was never a weak wizard. He's just blocked mentally, out of fear. Once he overcame that block in OotP, he started showing real power and potential. Snape is a demanding teacher, but as he comments, he gets above average scores from his students in the OWLs. Sabrina wrote: I was wondering if the reason as for Snape hating Neville, and Harry has to do with who is "the one." I think that Snape is mean to Neville, because he has some knowledge that Neville is actually "the one" who has to defeat Voldemort, and that is referred to in the prophecy. Snape is mean to Neville, because Neville is not up to par. Snape knows that he has to bring out Neville's potential. He can't do it in a supportive, caring way as Lupin might do because he also has to keep up the act of being a death eater in disguise, therefore cannot openly be nice to Neville. This may also explain why Snape is so much more horrible to Harry. Not only because of his gripe with James Potter, but also because he knows that Harry is not "the one." From ewe2 at 4dot0.net Sun Apr 17 22:23:56 2005 From: ewe2 at 4dot0.net (ewe2) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:23:56 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20050417222356.GF20194@4dot0.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127685 On Sun, Apr 17, 2005 at 10:03:50PM -0000, potioncat wrote: > If you are so sure you're going to be disappointed to tears, go read a > different book! Join a different group. There are over 600 book > discussion groups on Yahoo alone (I just typed book discussions in the > yahoo search bar and counted them.) > Or stay on this list, but if you can't say something nice, or something > connected to canon, don't say anything at all." Agreed. Where are the theories of yesteryear? Where are the cluehunters for the basis of the connection of Harry's eyes and wandless magic? WHY didn't Voldemort die? Here's my tip: Harry was only a baby and his aim was off. Think about that instead of this spoilt whining about bits of the book you don't like. We aren't likely to have this kind of fun again in our lifetimes, think about that too. OotP was the hardest HP book to read yet, but rereads were rewarding. I don't doubt next book will be even harder to bear for some of you, but I just don't care about that. I _want_ my preconceptions to be challenged. I _want_ the Rowling ship to successfully navigate the shoals of jagged plot reefs and _surprise_ me. God knows we need that in fiction. Otherwise it's a load of boring old farts disecting themes. But mostly I want to see Hermione and Ron get together :P Now, stop sooking and start theorising! Or smackies!! -- Windows XP: like KDE, only more annoying! From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 01:48:38 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 01:48:38 -0000 Subject: Snape as one of the Good Guys... analogies/Lupin as sexual predator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127686 Lealess: My point is, analogizing Lupin to a sexual predator, shouldn't the community have been notified of the potential danger, so it could at least take steps to protect the students? But of course, that would make Lupin unemployable, at least around children. The problem I have with some analogies is one of scale. Rape is a crime which seeks to destroy the core identity of the person attacked, is a violation of the person as much as anything else (it seems to me). Can we really say that is Snape's intent? I know some will, but I do not see the evidence. And Lupin can be a dangerous predator at certain times of the month, but overall, he does not want to make other people his victims. Keeping in mind that we see the class through Harry's eyes and through incidents which involve Harry and his friends, I wonder if anyone has ever told Snape that he is abusive to children? Shouldn't this be Dumbledore's responsibility, assuming he knows everything and is on the side of nice (and good)? What is his responsibility to children, bringing a recidivist werewolf on the grounds of Hogwarts? Alla: Well, IMO your Lupin's analogy is perfectly valid, I just see a different metaphor, that is all. I analogyse Lupin's condition to untreatable disease over which he has no control indeed and at that time he IS dangerous indeed. I would probably analogyze it to AIDS, I suppose. Why I would not analogyse him to sexual predator? Probably because he is trying to take steps to avoid people, NOT to seek them out,when he is a werewolf. I am not talking about THAT night when he forgot, I am talking in general. But as I said, I see where you are coming from. So, since I don't see Lupin's as sexual predator analogy, I cannot compare his and Snape's intent. You are right though we DON'T know what Snape intent is, because we don't know what he is thinking. If I were to judge by how he is acting though, then yes, I would conclude that his intent is not a very good one. But I fully accept the possibility of me being totally off base, of course. I also agree with you that deal with Snape SHOULD be Dumbledore's responsibility, as to whether Lupin should have been teaching - well, my answer is yes, because I don't think that people with untreatable disease should be unemployed and isolated, but if you see him as sexual predator, then I do understand your POV. Just my opinion, Alla From ejblack at rogers.com Mon Apr 18 01:52:51 2005 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 01:52:51 -0000 Subject: Assessing characters,:spin-off of psychological analysis Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127687 I have been following with great interest and enjoyment the threads pondering the psychological traits of Umbridge, Snape etc. I can't really add much to the discussion as my background is history/classics but I can contribute one thought. After 50 odd years of life, my rule of thumb in judging mental health or lack of it is quite simple. Does the person in queston have a friend? Is that person capable of having a friend? In the case of Umbridge I would say no. She is certainly capable of being fixated on someone (ie Fudge) but I cannot see her being able to sustain a free, equal, friendly relationship. She either grovels,sneers or attempts to control. Snape I can see with a friend. It would have to be with someone Snape would truely respect on a mental and professional level. It would be mostly unspoken but I think quite deep. I don't know if he would be comfortable having a friend. I don't think being liked is something he would deal with easily. Draco Malfoy is only shown with followers whom he despises. I can see him forming alliances of convenience but like his father he would never open up enough to have a true friend. Tom Riddle/Voldemort. Snort, giggle. No I don't think so even in his youngest days. Jeanette From sherriola at earthlink.net Mon Apr 18 01:51:33 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 18:51:33 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Disapointed in Potter? Message-ID: <16803863.1113789093542.JavaMail.root@skeeter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127688 If you are so sure you're going to be disappointed to tears, go read a > different book! Join a different group. There are over 600 book > discussion groups on Yahoo alone (I just typed book discussions in the > yahoo search bar and counted them.) > Or stay on this list, but if you can't say something nice, or something > connected to canon, don't say anything at all." Agreed. Where are the theories of yesteryear? Where are the cluehunters for the basis of the connection of Harry's eyes and wandless magic? WHY didn't Voldemort die? Here's my tip: Harry was only a baby and his aim was off. Think about that instead of this spoilt whining about bits of the book you don't like. We aren't likely to have this kind of fun again in our lifetimes, think about that too. Sherry now I, for one, never said I didn't like the books. However, when we read, watch movies, listen to music, we are affected by it. some things we like, and some things we don't. we review, study, theorize and discuss. the Harry Potter series is unlike anything I've ever read, and I love it for that. I am so glad that JKR chose to share her story with the world and take us along on the ride. But that doesn't mean I have to like every single thing she does in the books. It also doesn't mean that I expect her to write them to please me or any other fan. she should write to please herself most of all, because it is her story. My very favorite book in the world has a very mixed ending, happy and sad. Yet, I still reread it every couple years because it's too wonderful and moving to cast it aside just because of the ending. Yes, I said that if it all turns out to be a dream, I would never want to read future JKR works. I did not say that I wouldn't still love all of HP--up to the part where it all turned out to be a dream! It's ok to like and dislike certain parts, to be thrilled or disappointed in the story and where it goes. to me, that's a mark of how incredible the books really are, that they generate so much feeling and involvement with readers, that we can feel thrilled or disappointed in the outcome. That's part of why they are so great! Sherry From juli17 at aol.com Mon Apr 18 02:57:43 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 22:57:43 EDT Subject: UnderageMagic/GoodGuys/etc... Message-ID: <25.5da3d306.2f947c27@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127689 ReturnOfTheMutt: > Whoever said that wasn't comparing rape and assault. They were comparing > the self-centeredness of hurting the order by hurting one of it's members > through rape with the self-centeredness of hurting the order by hurting one > of > it's members though psychological torment. > Julie: I suppose that works as an analogy, but I just don't see what Snape does to Harry or Neville as psychological torment. He's mean and deliberately targets them at every opportunity (Neville's ineptness at Potions and Harry's frequent involvement in, shall we say, non-sanctioned activities give Snape that ample opportunity). Both boys may even be psychologically affected in small ways by Snape's treatment. But I don't see it as "torment," a term I would use for something causing the same kind of catastophic psychological damage as rape (if it's being compared to rape). In fact, as much as we'd all rather not have dealt with a nasty teacher, professor, boss, etc, as most of us have at one time or another in our lives, we learn something from those experiences, even increase our inner strength as a result of such encounters. That's just my opinion, and I admit to be very uncomfortable using rape in any analogy, because in some fundamental aspects it isn't analogous to *any* other crime or mistreatment. Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From juli17 at aol.com Mon Apr 18 03:39:46 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17ptf) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 03:39:46 -0000 Subject: Snape as one of the Good Guys... analogies/Lupin as sexual predator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127690 > > I also agree with you that deal(ing) with Snape SHOULD be Dumbledore's > responsibility, as to whether Lupin should have been teaching - > well, my answer is yes, because I don't think that people with > untreatable disease should be unemployed and isolated, but if you > see him as sexual predator, then I do understand your POV. > > Just my opinion, > > Alla Julie: Whether people with untreatable diseases should be unemployed or isolated probably depends on whether the disease is contagious, but I understand what you mean. The problem with Lupin is two-fold. First, his disease can directly affect the welfare of the children he's teaching. If his disease becomes "active," i.e., he transforms into werewolf form, then he is an extreme danger to his students. Secondly, his disease *is* treatable, with the wolfsbane potion. In this way, Lupin is more analogous to an alcoholic. As long as he is able to keep his disease under control, it's fine. But if he can't, then others around him can suffer horribly. If an alcoholic starts drinking again and decides to drive, then kills someone in a collision, we can say he was impaired, but that doesn't matter. He's still guilty of not controlling his disease, and of injuring/killing another person in the throes of said disease. And for Lupin it's actually easier. He has no desire or craving to transform into werewolf form, as an alcoholic does for alcohol. All he has to do is take his wolfsbane potion once a month, no matter what else might be going on. After all, he's a LETHAL danger to those around him. And yet he forgot. I agree with DD giving him the opportunity to teach, as long as Lupin is responsible enough to put the students safety above all else. Lupin failed that trust, and should have been fired for it by DD. Not left to resign on his own conscience, or because he was "outed" by Snape or anyone else, but fired. And I LIKE Lupin a lot (I hasten to add), but it doesn't matter. I also realize this was a plot point, and the character probably suffered for it, but it still paints Lupin as someone who made a very irresponsible error in judgment. Julie (who went on longer than she intended!) From navarro198 at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 03:51:16 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 03:51:16 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127691 Steve: As far as magic, in Hagrid's case, his magical education was stopped before he had his qualifications, and his wand was broken. So, I'm not so sure that Hagrid is banned from doing magic, he is banned from having and using a wand which in effect is the same as a ban on most magic. Bookworm: According to Hagrid, himself, he is not allowed to use magic: (PS/SS, Ch4) [after giving Dudley a pig's tail] "Be grateful if yeh didn't mention that ter anyone at Hogwarts," he said, "I'm ? er ? not supposed ter do magic, strictly speakin'. I was allowed ter do a bit ter follow yeh an' get yer letters to yeh an' stuff ? one o' the reasons I was so keen ter take on the job ? " (PS/SS, Ch5) [after telling Harry he flew to the rock but they would take the rowboat back] "Yeah ? but we'll go back in this. Not s'pposed ter use magic now I've got yeh." According to some of our British members, I've been told that there are no *qualifications* to complete school ? that is an American practice. Remember that while Fred and George were "of age" when they left Hogwarts, they hadn't completed formal schooling but were not banned from using magic. IMO, he was banned from using magic as a penalty for his "crime". Ravenclaw Bookworm From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 04:07:59 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 04:07:59 -0000 Subject: Re/GoodGuys/etc... In-Reply-To: <25.5da3d306.2f947c27@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127692 ReturnOfTheMutt: Whoever said that wasn't comparing rape and assault. They were comparing the self-centeredness of hurting the order by hurting one of it's members through rape with the self-centeredness of hurting the order by hurting one of it's members though psychological torment. Alla: Thank you SO much! That IS exactly what I was trying to say earlier. Julie: I suppose that works as an analogy, but I just don't see what Snape does to Harry or Neville as psychological torment. That's just my opinion, and I admit to be very uncomfortable using rape in any analogy, because in some fundamental aspects it isn't analogous to *any* other crime or mistreatment. Alla: Well, any crime upon one's person works for me. It does not have to be rape. It can be an assault, robbery, battery,whatever. The more I think about it , the more I like it - when we use the analogy of hypothetical order member ( who is still doing his part in war against Voldemort) committing basically ANY crime against another order member, which hurts that person deeply not only on the physical level but on emotional level as well. I doubt that anybody will call such order member a GOOD guy. So, to me the underlying idea behind that hypothetical action AND what Snape does is basically the same. I understand though that if you don't see Snape's actions as psychological torment, it will not work for you. Just my opinion, Alla. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 06:44:33 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 06:44:33 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127693 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ravenclaw Bookworm" wrote: > > Steve: > As far as magic, in Hagrid's case, his magical education was stopped > before he had his qualifications, and his wand was broken. So, I'm > not so sure that Hagrid is banned from doing magic, he is banned > from having and using a wand which in effect is the same as a ban on > most magic. > > Bookworm: > According to Hagrid, himself, he is not allowed to use magic: > (PS/SS, Ch4) [after giving Dudley a pig's tail] "... > "I'm ? er ? not supposed ter do magic, strictly speakin'. ... " > > bboyminn: The point I'm making, though I'm not insisting on it, is that being banned from having and using a wand, for most wizards, and especially the poorly educated Hagrid, is essentially the same as being banned from magic; No wand = No Magic. This is true with only a few rare exceptions which would be unlikely to apply to Hagrid. Because a vast majority of magic requires a wand, Hagrid is banned from doing magic by not being allowed a wand. As far as what Hagrid said, the 'What' is the same in your version and mine, it's only the 'Why' that is different. > Ravenclae Bookworm continues: > > According to some of our British members, I've been told that > there are no *qualifications* to complete school ? that is an > American practice. bboyminn: I don't think that's quite right. There is no 'graduation' in the UK, and it's true wizards like Fred and George don't need qualifications to use magic, they only need be of age. In Britain, the G.C.S.E. (O-Level, A-Level) exams are your qualifications. They are what you bring to a job interview to establish your abilities. Further, in both the USA and in the UK, once you reach a certain age, you are allowed to quit school; school is no longer compulsory. That age is typically 16. So, I'm not 100% sure of what you are getting at in this one point. Did you misspeak or did I misinterpret? > Ravenclae Bookworm continues: > > ...edited... > IMO, he was banned from using magic as a penalty for his > "crime". > > Ravenclaw Bookworm bboyminn: I'm not 100% entrenched in my idea, I'm only saying the regardless of how Hagrid says it, being banned for having and using a wand is effectively the same as being banned from performing magic. It's just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 18 06:50:06 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 06:50:06 -0000 Subject: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127694 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat steps into the room. She is known throughout HPfGU-lists for > her compassion, patience and sense of humor, always the respectful > poster in disagreements and discussions. > Or stay on this list, but if you can't say something nice, or something > connected to canon, don't say anything at all." > > Potioncat looks at the faces. Some shocked, some angry, some nodding in > agreement. She thinks that maybe she forgot to take her Wolfsbane > Potion this morning. > > Oh well, another reputation ruined. Geoff: Dear me. Well, it is Monday morning (At least here in the UK). I think you need a calming and cheering mug of hot chocolate after which the world will look a little less dreary. Seriously, I have had a feeling for some weeks that the group is treading water waiting for the arrival of the Queen of Sheba (sorry, the Half-Blood Prince!)on 16th July. There is a tendency at any point in time for a particular thread to dominate the lists for a few days and that has been the case lately and we also seem to have been retracing our steps a lot. Some of them are threads which do not interest me personally and so I leave them (I never get involved in a Snape thread for example). Of late, and I noticed quite a drop in the number of postings over the last weekend. A bit of burnout I think... It's a bit like being in the waiting room at the railway station waiting for our service to arrive. Once we're on board our next journey into the unknown, I'm sure things will pick up and the theorisers and conspiracy theorists will have a whole new pack to shuffle. Just hang in there for the next 89 days. From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 18 06:53:28 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 06:53:28 -0000 Subject: What would dissapoint you about HBP? -- Grawp In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127695 > Lupinlore asked: > > >> 7) Seeing a great deal of Grawp. >> >snip Bonnie: > What was JKR's purpose in putting Grawp in the book? I know JKR > said he would be back and would be much better behaved. Oh dear! > > Bonnie (maybe I'm prejudiced against giants) I truly don't care for this section of the book either; I almost always skip the chapter "Hagrrid's Tale" in my rereads. I can't say why, exactly; maybe because it seems to slow the action up, maybe because after the whole thing, Hagrid doesn't really have anything much to report (although I do like the parallel between him and a proselytizing missionary, where sometimes all you can do is sew seeds you hope will come to fruition some day). If she brings Grawp back, I do hope he's made better use of. On another note, phoenixgod2000 wrote: "8. The thing that I most want to see Harry happy. I want a year where Harry isn't helplessly watching as stuff piles up on him while he has no recourse. I want an acknowledgement that Harry has done and seen more than in a few years than most witches and wizards will ever see in their entire lives and I want that reflected in the way adults treat him. Nothing upset me more in ootp than when Harry was being treated like he was an ordinary teenager when he is anything but." I would also like to see Harry happy, but I would like it to be an internal change. A lot of what is uncomfortable for me in OOP is that he struggles sooooo much. He really seems very close to the breaking point. I would like to see him really refined by the fuller's fire, if you take my meaning; I would like to see him made strong and confident by is past challenges. I am sure tough stuff will keep being thrown at him, but I hope he finds the strength within himslef to rise above it and have peace. I want Harry to get to the place where he no longer cares about what anyone else says or does, where he just knows who he is, what his purpose is, and where he's going when he dies. Because then it won't matter what the world throws at him, he's going to have the strenght to overcome it all. He wouldn't be any kind of Christ figure, or even much of a hero, if he weren't willing and able to suffer anything and rise above it. imamommy who realizes this post illustrates a lot of parellels between her religion and HP, and wonders if she should tell Hans that the series is actually based on Mormonism instead of Rosicrucianism. (J/K Hans :) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 07:14:13 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 07:14:13 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127696 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > ...I'm still in the dark. ...what can they actually do for the > rest of their lives? They can only go to wizard-related > universities, work in wizard-related industries in the > wizard-world... because if they live in the muggle world, all the > years of magic-training is worthless. I just think JKR has created > a poorly thought out world, that's all. > > Sandra bboyminn: I'm sure by now you've read my other reply to your original post which admittedly was quite long. I do see the basis of what you are saying, but you seem to be taking that basic idea to an extreme. Exactly why can't Hogwarts graduates work in the muggle world, and why is the magic-training worthless? Yes, if is more difficult for a Hogwarts graduate to follow the standard path of education, job and career, but wizards are not completely illiterate. They have reasonable proficiency in reading, writing, and basic math. Though admittedly somewhat lacking in muggle history, arts, and sciences. But how would that prevent Hermione from opening a small business, or going into business partnership with someone else. Certainly there are many many people in the world who are hugely successful who don't follow the standard generic muggle career path. And I'm not sure what you mean by magic-training being worthless. Something else you said in you original post implies that if they live a muggle life they could never-ever use magic, which isn't true. If you mean they couldn't apply their magic-training to a muggle job, that is mostly true, but not completely so, and it certainly doesn't mean that they can't apply their general intelligence and talent to any desired muggle pursuit. I agree that only being a Hogwarts graduate, does limit your ability to work in the muggle world, but that limitation applies mostly to pursuing a very conventional career path. There are many many opportunities for less conventional means of earning a substantial living in the muggle world that are open to wizards. So, to some extent, I do agree with your basic idea, but I think you are blowing it out of proportion; making it more than it really is. Just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 10:23:27 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:23:27 -0000 Subject: Life was Re: Behind the Locked Door...Self Sacrifice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127697 > Kemper now: > I don't think Voldie WANTS life. I think he doesn't want death. He > fears death which is not the same as embracing life. Those who > embrace life seem less afraid of dying. To fully embrace life means > to accept all that it is to be alive: Grief, Love, Anger, > Disappointment, Extacy, Joy, Lust, etc. > > Harry, as he is written, seems more full of life than full of love. > > So, when Voldie goes to possess him, Voldie runs away because he is > afraid or doesn't understand what it is to live. > > Only supposing. > > Kemper Chys: That makes more sense, that one who is full of life can accept death. Maybe that's why Voldie fears DD, he's saying death is just the next great adventure, so he obviously accepts it. It's a power against LV, to live (and to die) and to love so much that you would die for another, like Lily did. (Ok so Harry's full of a lot of anger, but he loves his friends- more that LV does for his followers.Hm.) So if Harry has so much of this and he's not afraid of dying once he accepts it, it leads me to believe there's going to be that self- sacrifice on Harry's part, once he accepts that to live is to eventually die. I think in this life aspect, LV is in the non-living department, he's just existing, not living. I'm assuming there's something about that unicorn blood and a half-life/cursed life reference which will come full circle later, at least if things are explained more clearly afterwords it could be a possibility. (JKR has so many references that don't seem important until later so I'm not overlooking anything as inconsequential.) Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 10:46:11 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:46:11 -0000 Subject: body... veil... where??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127698 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nicole angeles > wrote: > > > > > > question again... > > > > What happened to Sirius' body when he fell behind the black veil??? > It has to go somewhere... Where did it go??? > > GEO: Probably to the same place where Obi-Wan's and Yoda's bodies went > when they became one with the Force and ascended. Chys: SPANDEX SPACE! *Gundam Wing anime joke about Heero pulling guns from his skin tight shorts.* Honestly though, I never understood that part of the story. Maybe that's part of the mystery of the veil, and why it's located in the DOM so they can study it? Maybe no one really knows if you die when you go through it, I can imagine some fearless adventurers had walked through to never return, and that could have brought up questions on the destination. (Although JKR said he's dead... so maybe she knows.) It reminds me of a book, the novella: 'The Crystal Ship' where there's a pool of water (or some substance) on board the ship, and if you throw yourself into the water, you travel across space to another world (The homeworld, supposedly) but you can never return, and so it's thought of as a death when one sends themselves to the unknown place, not knowing if they made it there or if they will ever be back. It's a one way trip to a long forgotten place, the place of your origin. (I recommend that book, if you like furres or anthros, it's an older sci-fi with a few other stories too.) The Sirius death scene always reminded me of this. Chys From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 12:09:23 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:09:23 -0000 Subject: Constellations reveal HBP In-Reply-To: <1e6.39b0962a.2f914869@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127699 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chnc1024 at A... wrote: > > Chancie: > I like your theory [Regulus Black being the HBP], but I'm afraid that JKR stated he was in fact dead. > JKR had this to say about Regulus at the World book day chat > March 4, 2004: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > * Cathedral: Will we be hearing anything from Sirius Black's brother, > Regulus, in future books? > JK Rowling replies -> Well, he's dead, so he's pretty quiet these days. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > But of course as others have said, the HBP doesn't necessarily have > to be alive, so we'll just have to see how that turns out. Not only that, but notice the answer relative to the question. The question was a pretty clear "yes or no" question but the answer was clever and simultaneously ambiguous. That is to say, there are a few ways to take it: "Well, he's dead, so you won't hear from him again." or "Well, he's dead, which explains why you haven't heard much from him until now." or "Well, he's dead, so you may expect him to work in some undead capacity without attracting attention to himself." -Joe in SoFla From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Apr 18 13:06:33 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:06:33 -0000 Subject: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127700 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > > If you are so sure you're going to be disappointed to tears, go read a > different book! Join a different group. There are over 600 book > discussion groups on Yahoo alone (I just typed book discussions in the > yahoo search bar and counted them.) > > Or stay on this list, but if you can't say something nice, or something > connected to canon, don't say anything at all." Well, none of those things is going to happen, I'm afraid. That is, people expressing their disappointments aren't going to go away, they aren't going to stop speaking, and they aren't going to quit reading the books. As with politics, discussion of literature does engender a great deal of disagreement and expression of discontent. It's the nature of the beast. If it makes people frustrated and distressed to here the HP books criticized, I am truly sorry, but it isn't going to stop or change. The fact is that people bring many different things to the books, and what pleases one will severely disappoint another. There is nothing wrong with that, nor is there anything at all wrong with expressing EITHER pleasure or disappointment. The only thing people can do is to express their genuine feelings and perceptions. All you can ask of people when it comes to the basic content of their opinions is that they be honest. Now, the fact is that many people feel that JKR has made some serious mistakes, and there is nothing wrong whatsoever with having that opinion. Many of these same people also believe she has had some major triumphs -- which in many ways make the mistakes all the more tragic. Other people feel like whatever mistakes JKR may have made are very minor, and there is nothing wrong with that, either. Now, and here's where we get to the nub, both sets of people have every right to air their opinions and will do so. And if you think that the other side is going to shut up, or go away, or quit reading the books, you are buying into a belief that is going to cause you an enormous amount of pain and anguish because IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. Indeed, as the final form of the plot and characters becomes evident, the expressions of disagreement and discontent will only multiply. It is an inevitability and even JKR herself has said as much. To put it in a humorous way (and this IS meant as a pure joke, so don't anybody fly off the handle) if you are deeply distressed by expressions of disappointment, disagreement, and outright severe criticism of JKR and the books, you might want to find something a little less stressful to do in your spare time. I suggest volunteering for the local bomb squad. Lupinlore From kking0731 at gmail.com Mon Apr 18 14:05:48 2005 From: kking0731 at gmail.com (snow15145) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:05:48 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader responce was Re: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127701 Lupinlore snipped: Now, and here's where we get to the nub, both sets of people have every right to air their opinions and will do so. And if you think that the other side is going to shut up, or go away, or quit reading the books, you are buying into a belief that is going to cause you an enormous amount of pain and anguish because IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN. Snow: There have been such excellent postings in the past and views on determining authorial intent and the "allowable reader response"; seeing through rose-colored glasses or a (Harry) filter can undermine the obvious. The intent of the writer is to confuse the reader by such tactic but at the same time place clues in an obscure manner to entertain the notion that she hasn't lied or pulled a fast one. In such a situation it is now up to the reader to figure out that old question `what is canon', just because it was said does not make it a truth; Sirius claimed that Crouch Jr. was dead and so the reader did not question beyond that which the Sirius filter had claimed in canon. To this extent it is up to the reader to determine what parts of the storyline are an absolute and which may be a filtered cover- up. Rowling uses carefully placed wording throughout to set up the canon faith reader, and in the end to justify her means. When you can use canon examples like this to support your views as to what the author may do next, in my opinion, is not only the reader's privilege but to a certain extent an obligation. This type of writing is what promotes audience participation, which is highly encouraged by the writer herself and what this forum was created for. HOWEVER, when you go beyond the invisible boundary to delegate what the writer should have done or should do, you have now ceased to explore the world of the writer and the limits that are allowable as a mere reader. It is this boundary that has been crossed and is, as you put it, "a nub" to those who are viewing the books and world that Joanne Rowling created and NOT what we demand of the writer to produce or we will trash, burn or otherwise mutilate the books as you yourself, in the past, reiterated time and again. Snow "So when you hear someone sneer at the Harry Potter books, either they haven't read them, and are therefore too ignorant to be listened to, or they haven't understood them, and are therefore not clever enough to take part in serious adult conversations."-- Orson Scott Card From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 14:29:56 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:29:56 -0000 Subject: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127702 Potioncat wrote: > Potioncat steps into the room. She is known throughout HPfGU-lists for > her compassion, patience and sense of humor, always the respectful > poster in disagreements and discussions. > > She looks around, takes a deep breath and screams at the top of her > lungs, "I've had it! > > If you are so sure you're going to be disappointed to tears, go read a > different book! Join a different group. There are over 600 book > discussion groups on Yahoo alone (I just typed book discussions in the > yahoo search bar and counted them.) > > Or stay on this list, but if you can't say something nice, or something > connected to canon, don't say anything at all." > > Potioncat looks at the faces. Some shocked, some angry, some nodding in > agreement. She thinks that maybe she forgot to take her Wolfsbane > Potion this morning. > > Oh well, another reputation ruined. Hannah: Nice deep breaths now... The trouble is, we as fans are so deeply invested in the books. I for one have devoted hours of time and not inconsiderable expense to thinking about HP, discussing HP, reading and writing HP fanfiction. And I've enjoyed every minute of it. But I suppose with the new book coming up, we all start to worry that it's not going to live up to our (very high) expectations, and that somehow we'll feel that we've invested our time badly. Actually, I don't think we will have done, because as long as you've enjoyed your participation in the fandom, that's what matters. I think that JKR's recent 'not everyone will like it' comment on her website has thrown fans into a bit of a panic. When I first read it, my instinctive reaction was 'oh no, what's wrong with it!' But I soon got over that and realised that it's not only a sensible authorial caveat, but a dead cert. It's not possible to write a book that every single person that reads it will enjoy. That's another problem at present; we've discussed all that there is to discuss a thousand times, and everyone's just waiting impatiently for the release of HBP. So when JKR updates her website, we all fall on it eagerly and analyse every scrap of it (I am extremely guilty of this). JKR herself, however, isn't thinking of it like that, having other things on her mind. I'm sure she didn't mean to put anyone off reading. I shan't be upset with HBP on the grounds that any theory or ship is proved wrong/right, or even if a favourite character dies/ is developed in a way I dislike. The only thing that would really disappoint me is if it isn't written well. But knowing JKR, I don't think that it will be. Even OotP, which is my least favourite of the five, is still a darn good book. So I do understand why people fear that they shan't enjoy HBP. After all the years of anticipation, it would be a dreadful shame. But there's no point worrying about it; we'd be much better off to get down to discussing the canon we have and debating wild conspiracy theories. Hannah From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Apr 18 15:02:39 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:02:39 -0000 Subject: Another look at House criteria (was Re: the Sorting Hat) In-Reply-To: <61.26bb4218.2ac8cc31@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127703 Potioncat sits down with her hot chocolate and gives her Time Turner a twist. After reading a few minutes, she comes upon a post from 2002. Jodel wrote this about the sorting hat: >JOdel: > Well, if nothing else it is one powerfully charmed object (leading me to suppose that Godric was probably the Hogwarts Charms Master in the early days). I suspect that when the Sorting Hat was first being "programed" each of the founders put it on and thought about what qualities their ideal student would have. Which gifts they wanted to train and guide. Creating a template, as it were. And the Hat compares each of the students it sorts to find the closest match. snip> > I suspect that a few of the more questionable placements which we have seen, (Crabbe and Goyle, Longbottom) have less to do with some hidden quality which they *have* than with the absence of some quality which the founder of the house to which they might appear to be more suited would have demanded. > > For example; Longbottom *appears* to be best suited for Hufflepuff. Why? Because of Hufflepuff's reputation as being a "lot of duffers"? Probably. Longbottom certainly appears to be a full-scale duffer. But was Helga selecting for duffers? No. Helga was selecting for good little "other-directed" worker bees who perform as a team and don't rock the boat. > Just about every quality she placed a premium on (fairness, loyalty, kindness) was aimed at greasing the wheels of cooperation within a self-defined group, topped off by the endurance necessary to get the job done. > > I don't really get the feeling that Neville, for all that he needs a lot of one-on-one help from others in his classwork, is really all that much of a team player. He's much too self-contained for Helga's taste. Any of the other founders valued that quality more than she did. Neville's detachment isn't of the intellectual order that Rowena favored either, and ghod knows he is too direct for Salizar. Godric would have taken him on, and gladly, self-sufficiency and straightforwardness are qualities he apreciated. There's no mystery at all in Neville's placement. He's a Gryffindor. Potioncat: I sort of like the idea that someone was sorted into Gryffindor because they weren't good enough for Hufflepuff. Sort of sets our paradigm on edge. "The absense of some quality which the founder of the House... would have demanded" is an interesting slant as well. Assuming, as hardly no does, that all Houses are equal, it's not only a case of fitting well here, but of not fitting well there. We've played Which House any number of times. In some case we've seen whether we were any good at it. In other cases we've looked at characters already known for their Houses and asked "Why?" So here are two queries: 1.What quality did characters lack that sorted them out of a House? Why didn't Sirius or Percy go to Slytherin? Why wasn't Cedric in Gryffindor? Why wasn't_______ in __________? 2. Are Slytherin and Hufflepuff the two over-flow houses? (That is, not loyal, not brave, not clever, not ambitious...Pureblood to Slytherin, Muggleborn to Hufflepuff.) Potioncat From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Apr 18 15:04:45 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:04:45 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader responce was Re: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127704 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snow15145" wrote: > > > > > HOWEVER, when you go beyond the invisible boundary to delegate what > the writer should have done or should do, you have now ceased to > explore the world of the writer and the limits that are allowable as > a mere reader. It is this boundary that has been crossed and is, as > you put it, "a nub" to those who are viewing the books and world that > Joanne Rowling created and NOT what we demand of the writer to > produce or we will trash, burn or otherwise mutilate the books as you > yourself, in the past, reiterated time and again. > > Snow > And what, precisely, gives anyone, other than the list elves, the right to rule any discussion off limits? People have every right to express their opinions as long as it is done in accordance with list rules. Now, as far as I know, there is no list rule that forbids speculating on canon and the possible developments of it, and to express what one will approve or disapprove of. Now, you may disagree with that practice and not like the kind of posts it engenders, but the fact is that there is no rule against it on this board or any other of which I am aware. No one is under any command whatsoever to remain within invisible boundaries as long as the discussion is based on canon. To wit: Canon says that Remus Lupin had a very small role in OOTP. He is one of my favorite characters whom I find quite interesting. If he does not appear in HBP more than he did in OOTP I will be disappointed. I will probably find it a mistake on JKR's part. That is absolutely and undeniably my right to say. There is no rule that I know of against it, and trying to prevent that type of discussion amounts to censoring opinions you don't happen to like. In short, there is no such thing as "allowable boundaries of reader response." JKR has every right to write anything she wants for anyone she wants for any reason she wants. Readers in turn have every right to respond in any way they want for any reason they want. There are no rules, there are no allowable or unallowable boundaries of reader response, there are no illegitimate responses. Now, there are rules in a particular forum. But there is no rule in this forum or any other I know of against speculating on canon and offering opinions. Indeed, HPfGU specifically does not dictate any mode of response or method of interpretation. Any attempt to do so by anyone other than the list elves amounts to overstepping your bounds. Lupinlore From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 15:11:29 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:11:29 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127705 Lupinlore wrote: > I saw this question on another site and thought I'd try it out here. > What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? My > list includes: > > 1) Harry recovering too quickly and easily from the various things > that have happened. Also Harry forgiving various people for various > things too easily. Hannah: I would like to see Harry dealing with things and coping. Maybe I've just read too many angsty!Harry fanfics. We've already seen Harry struggle to cope with the aftermath of GoF, and JKR ha indicated that in HBP he will have to at least partially recover, from necessity as much as anything. For me, I don't think this is going to be a problem in the next books. > 4)Hermione not getting a much-needed lesson in humility and > understanding. Hannah: I don't mind either way. In fact, I would argue that she did have something of that lesson at the end of OotP, with Umbridge and the centaurs. Not a lot was made of it, but that's because it's Harry's POV and he had other things on his mind at the time. > 12) Not learning that something exceedingly nasty has come of > Umbridge. Hannah: Something exceedingly nasty - if unspecific - has already happened to Umbridge. Whatever the centaurs did traumatised her, she's been thrown out of Hogwarts with the mockery she deserved, and Fudge has fallen from grace. I've no desire to see her further tortured - she had her comeuppance. Unless she has some sort of plot relevance, I don't even know if we'll hear anything about her. She's old news now. As I said in another post, the only thing that would really disappoint me about HBP is if it was badly written with poor explanations and plot holes etc. But I don't think that it will be. I still have faith in JKR, and even plot twists that I think I wouldn't like could be made brilliant by her pen. For example, Grawp. I didn't like him OotP, but I believe that she could still use him effectively. And even though OotP had its faults, I still loved it. Although I have theories that I like, and things I'd quite like to happen, I'm not going to be disappointed if they're wrong. I'll just think up some new ones. And what's fanfic for if it's not for writing/ reading what we'd have liked to see in canon but didn't get? Hannah From naama_gat at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 17:03:48 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 17:03:48 -0000 Subject: Will Harry recover too fast? (was Re: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127706 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat4001" wrote: > > "lupinlore" : > > What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? > > My list includes: > > > > 1) Harry recovering too quickly and easily from the various > > things that have happened. Also Harry forgiving various people > > for various things too easily. > > Marianne: > > Although it would disappoint me, too, I wouldn't be surprised, if > this is exactly what happens. Until the appearance of CAPLOCKS! > HARRY, he'd always shown an amazing resiliency to the disturbances > in his life. I had the sneaking feeling that JKR already sent Harry > through an abbreviated version of the stages of grief at the end of > OoP with regards to Sirius' death. He showed denial when struggling > with Remus in front of the veil, anger when exploding in DD's > office, bargaining with the idea that he could deal with the death > if Sirius would come back as a ghost. And, that walk from the train > station seemed to symbolize an acceptance of the position of > leadership, and in having to go forward to face the future. I'm > missing the fourth stage here (I always forget that one!) My feeling is that the opposite will happen - that HBP, as far as Harry's emotional development goes, will be dominated by Sirius' death. At the end of OoP, Harry is left with a huge baggage that he has just taken the first step to deal with (the first step being starting to grieve - with Luna's help). Harry hasn't accepted reasonable responsibility to Sirius' death - the guilt is so unbearable to him right now, that he projects it on Snape (that's how I understand it, anyway). That's a huge deal - consciously, he blames Snape of the death of the most important person in the world to him. That has to blow up at some point - and very dramatically (if not tragically). Although you point to some steps that Harry has taken in dealing with Sirius' death, they are mostly about getting over the denial - that Sirius can somehow be gotten back, that it didn't really happen. Harry has reached the point where he accepts, emotionally, Sirius' death - now there's tons of grief and rage for him to go through. If you look at OoP structurally, it never really strays far from what happened in the graveyard, Voldemort's resurrection. So much of what Harry feels and does and goes through is linked, directly and indirectly to that. I think that if JKR did this in OoP, she will treat the no-less traumatic (in a different way) death of Sirius just as seriously in HBP. Naama From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 17:58:12 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 17:58:12 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127707 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > > Right here goes, I think I might be unpopular after this and I > accept that I have little right to criticise as I am a student > and not an author but... I thought that Sirius's death was lame. > > -Pause while you gasp with shock- > > I mean he was Harry's mentor/surrogate father/best friend and a key > character (I thought) for the future books and instead of dying > bravely in battle he falls through a doorway! > > I can hypothesise that JK may have been trying to demonstrate the > frailty of life or how the dead are still close to us. But I feel > that it could have been expressed in a more dramatic and fitting > way. But in many ways JKR's was more realistic. Death is often senseless - one minute your loved one or friend is healthy and alongside you and the next he's gone. Death in battle isn't always glorious. Jim Ferer From greatelderone at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 18:08:32 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 18:08:32 -0000 Subject: Another look at House criteria (was Re: the Sorting Hat) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127708 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > 1.What quality did characters lack that sorted them out of a House? > Why didn't Sirius or Percy go to Slytherin? Why wasn't Cedric in > Gryffindor? Why wasn't_______ in __________? GEO: I don't think the hat's top priorities are the qualities of its charges, but rather in the end what the students themselves want. Why else are all of the children of Death Eaters sorted into Slytherin (Malfoy, Nott, Crabbe, Goyle with the latter two having shown more loyality than ambition in their five years) while all the Weasley children are sorted into Gryffindor (Percy as noted clearly has lots of ambition more so than Harry who the hat said would do well in Slytherin) and then we have the Gryffindor Marauders that previous fan theories have noted contain qualities more appropriate for the other houses (Sirius in Slytherin, Remus in Ravenclaw and possibly Wormtail in Hufflepuff) not to mention the current generation of Gryffindors like Hermione who is very Ravenclaw like yet from the beginning wanted to be in Gryffindor and Harry who the hat said would do well in Slytherin yet was placed in Gryffindor because he didn't wish to join Slytherin House. From empooress at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 02:28:48 2005 From: empooress at yahoo.com (Kim McGibony) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 19:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Constellations reveal HBP In-Reply-To: <1113634183.4346.96115.m20@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20050418022849.31931.qmail@web52101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127709 wrote: I submit that Regulus Black is not only alive, but is the Half-Blood Prince; and in book 6 we will discover that the House of Black isn't as "toujours pur" as advertised. It also opens up all kinds of tinned invertebrates about the disposition of 12 Grimmauld Place and the future of the Order. Chancie: I like your theory, but I'm afraid that JKR stated he was in fact dead. Empooress: Well, this has gotten me to thinking that Regulus,must surely be a pureblood but his child might not be. IF he had fallen in love with a muggle woman this may also have been a reason why he got cold feet. Maybe the HPB will be a new student at Hogwarts this year. An unknown heir to the Black family. Could possibly even be Sirius's child. We do know that the family can be traced back many generations. Empooress From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 08:15:43 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:15:43 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127710 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > So, to some extent, I do agree with your basic idea, but I think you are blowing it out of proportion; making it more than it really is.Just one man's opinion. > Steve/bboyminn Thanks for replying, and your answer was really interesting! I'm not sure about me taking it to an extreme though, because I still think Hogwartians are at a huge disadvantage. They spend 7 years getting qualifications that seem to lead practically nowhere. If, for example, one of the Weasleys didn't want a life in what you suggest (farming, printing etc), and fancied becoming either an investment banker, a vet or a chemical engineer (no, really) he would have to go right back to square one and waste quite a few years catching up with those of a muggle-education. It wouldn't happen, and likewise, it wouldn't happen for an awful lot of other careers. Say Hermione had to go back to her parents after finishing at Hogwarts, due to sudden illnesses and infirmities or whatever - then what? She can't go to a muggle university because she has no recognised qualifications, and getting a job would be difficult because the only kind she could get would be the kind that require no formal certificates - and that would probably make her brain explode. So I stand by my point - going to Hogwarts is a big step backwards for the kids, because JKR never thought out the credibility of the place. it should have been a summer camp, and nothing more. Sandra. From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Mon Apr 18 10:47:48 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 10:47:48 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ebennet68" wrote: > > > tinglinger: > > I also request for comments from anyone who has read the > > Jane Austen or Dorothy Sayers books to post their comments > > as to how plot elements from these books parallel the > > Potter series. > Oh, you rash person, you! I can't see which Dorothy L Sayers books are on the JKR website shelf. However... DLS translated Dante's Inferno (and Purgatorio, and Paradiso), and did a good job. (I take it we're all familiar with Dante, or know how to become so.) She was a committed Christian, and a friend of people like CS Lewis and Tolkien. Seems to have been a tweedy, hand-knit cardigan kind of lady who never married but did have an illegitimate child at one point! Apart from her translations and some Christmassy stuff for the BBC, she's best known as one of the stars of the English detective story - in the 30s there were several women who wrote rather cerebral, bloodless stories all of which featured various free-lance detectives who are able to solve cases that the police give up on! Enter DLS's contribution to the genre: Lord Peter Wimsey. First off, the name would clearly appeal to JKR - whimsical in the extreme, Lord Peter is. The younger son of a Duke and a half-French woman (does that make him a half-blood?), he served in the First World War with great gallantry out of a sense of duty; he still sometimes gets flashbacks. Never had to work; lived on the income from his inherited properties. And detected, as a hobby and from a sense of duty. Very musical, academically brilliant, extremely talented at cricket (which blows his cover in one of the novels). Rather short; fair hair. For most of the canon, is hopelessly in love with one Harriet Vane, an author of detective stories who is falsely accused of murder until Lord P gets her off; she won't consider a relationship based on condescension and gratitude, so keeps on refusing him until finally, and at great length, she falls. And they live happily ever after. Lord P has the obligatory batman who saves his life in the trenches and goes on to be his Jeevesified manservant. Can't recall the poor bloke's name, but he's a rubber stamp anyway. So, as far as my eyes can see, there are some obvious parallels but many more vast differences! They're pretty dated now, but highly literate, well written books, quite intricate and well planned plots and no memorable villains or towering deeds of evil. Not a Moriarty in sight. Just human weakness leading to temptation, to crime, and to more crimes by way of covering one's tracks. If anyone can see further into the fog than I can - highly likely, I should think - I'll be most interested to read your suggestions. Deborah, fond of Lord P but fonder of Jane Austen and The Little White Horse From jmrazo at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 19:44:37 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:44:37 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader responce was Re: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127712 > Snow: > > HOWEVER, when you go beyond the invisible boundary to delegate what > the writer should have done or should do, you have now ceased to > explore the world of the writer and the limits that are allowable as > a mere reader. I can't be the only one who finds this more than a little insulting. The 'mere' reader is pretty darn important and we are allowed to go anywhere we please when we look at a story. It is this boundary that has been crossed and is, as > you put it, "a nub" to those who are viewing the books and world that > Joanne Rowling created and NOT what we demand of the writer to > produce or we will trash, burn or otherwise mutilate the books as you > yourself, in the past, reiterated time and again. I don't demand anything of a writer. I can't. believe me, if I could I wouldn't be so worried about stuff I don't like coming up in the story. I do have things I would like to see and not see in the story. That is my absolute right. I've invested a lot of time and emotion into harry potter. I am absolutely allowed to have the opinion DD was out of character in OOTP. I am absolutely allowed to have the opinion that Ginny was poorly characterized and foreshadowed. I am absiolutely allowed to think that Luna is one of my favorite literary characters in the last five years. I am absolutely allowed to think that OOTP was oddly plotted out and relied on characters acting in a fashion not in line with previous books. I am absolutely allowed to complain about any damn thing I want to. And I am absolutely allowed to be waiting with baited breath for the next book. I complain about books and shows that I love and want to see be the best they can be. I don't waste my time with books that I hate. I'm not a member of any John Knowles book lists because I think his books are steaming piles of you-know-what. I think Harry Potter is one of the most ingenious concepts for a book ever. and I want to enjoy to the ride. Part of the ride is saying what I did and did not like about the stories. I'm not going to stop, so learn to love the ride phoenixgod2000 From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 13:03:50 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:03:50 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's Tale (was:Re: What would dissapoint you about HBP? -- Grawp) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127713 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elady25" wrote: ...I almost > always skip the chapter "Hagrrid's Tale" in my rereads. I can't say > why, exactly; maybe because it seems to slow the action up, maybe > because after the whole thing, Hagrid doesn't really have anything > much to report... I had just the opposite reaction to "Hagrid's Tale"--I've gone back to the book just to reread that chapter. OotP is full of scenes wherein Harry learns about a darker side of most of the people in his life--most notably his father's cruel streak and Dumbledore's terrible error--but Hagrid finally gets a chance to shine. Up until now, Hagrid has been presented to us as a lovable oaf, well meaning, certainly, but sort of silly. Then we heard his story, and began to understand why Dumbledore would trust this man with his life, why he would send Hagrid to retrieve baby Harry from the rubble of his parent's hiding place and guard him for the "missing 24 hours". Best of all, there were little hints throughout the other books that this new, improved Hagrid has been there all along--starting with Dumbledore's declaration of trust in book 1--just waiting for us to realize their significance. > If she brings Grawp > back, I do hope he's made better use of. I think the Grawp business is a lit fuse for a plot bomb in book 6 or 7. I expect, uhm, big things from him. Amiable Dorsai From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 13:24:55 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 13:24:55 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127714 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > Thanks for the reply, but I'm still in the dark. They might learn > how to control their magic, but what can they actually do for the > rest of their lives? Break curses, wrangle dragons, heal the sick, play Quidditch, raise magical plants, chase the bad guys, open a shop, teach the young, practice politics, breed kneazles, brew Potions, steal cauldrons, liase with Muggles, support the Dark Lord, fight the Dark Lord... And these are just some of the possibilities that we've seen in a story that is distinctly *not* about the economics of Wizarding. >They can only go to wizard-related > universities, work in wizard-related industries in the > wizard-world... because if they live in the muggle world, all the > years of magic-training is worthless. I just think JKR has created > a poorly thought out world, that's all. On the contrary, the insularity of the Wizarding world and the problems that breeds seem to be central to the story JKR is telling. Amiable Dorsai From DANCERWH86 at aol.com Mon Apr 18 13:26:44 2005 From: DANCERWH86 at aol.com (DANCERWH86 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:26:44 -0400 Subject: Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: <1113823822.16769.41918.m19@yahoogroups.com> References: <1113823822.16769.41918.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C71231666BBB8C-1D8-37B5A@mblk-d29.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127715 Katrina wrote: <<>>> I think that that is the very reason his death is so 'lame'. It was meaningless. Yeah, he was fighting in a small battle in a way, but their really was no point to his death. It wasn't for the side of good and it wasn't a big theatrical death scene. Now minus the magic and falling through a doorway, this is very much like when someone we know dies. Death isn't always dramatic and their doesn't always seem to be a point. I think taking a very popular character to illustrate that point reiterates to the reader that anyone can die no one is immortal even ones who seem invincible (escaping Azkaban etc...). As big of a Sirius fan as I am and as much as I would like to see him miraculously return, I think JKR should stick to her original statement that he was really dead. Bringing him back would diminish the impact. I think the fact that he was Harry's closest thing to a father/mentor is also important. Because (and I know I've seen a few comparisons in other threads) there is the chance that Harry could pull an Anakin Skywalker and go to the dark side. I mean in book three he was ready to kill Sirius and now there's a sense of how deeply trouble he's become. fear leads to anger anger leads to hate hate leads to the darkside (or something to that effect). I don't think Harry is just going to want to win the good fight for Sirius now, there's going to be a lot of pain for him and probably a turning away from his destiny. Lindsay ~~~~~ For All my Peeps in Art History: West Virginia: We couldn't decide to be "West Virginia" or "Northeast Kentucky." Finally, Clem picked up a rock and said, "See that old refrigerator in the creek yonder? If I hit it, we'll be Northeast Kentucky." Well I don't have to tell you what happened. (Conan O'Brien) For Me and Reese: Connecticut: The state the Red Sox have to drive through when they lose to the Yankees! (We're gonna be back and better than ever April 1st) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dawnbenns at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 18:20:09 2005 From: dawnbenns at hotmail.com (deeby8658) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 18:20:09 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127716 In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > > Right here goes, I think I might be unpopular after this and I > accept that I have little right to criticise as I am a student > and not an author but... I thought that Sirius's death was lame. > > -Pause while you gasp with shock- > > I mean he was Harry's mentor/surrogate father/best friend and a key > character (I thought) for the future books and instead of dying > bravely in battle he falls through a doorway! Deeby: Sorry if all this has been said before - haven't visited the list in a while - but I had always thought that JKR was referencing Tennyson's 'In Memoriam' here: O for thy voice to soothe and bless! What hope of answer, or redress? Behind the veil, behind the veil. I love this poem and felt that by quoting so closely from it JK was signposting the immense grief that Harry must suffer and was pointing us to the key lines that it is 'better to have loved and lost/ Than never to have loved at all'. Considering DD's comments on the DoM's most mysterious room, Jk seems to be saying that Love is the quality that Harry has in abundance. Interestingly too the poem talks of redress/revenge - perhaps Harry *needs* the death of Sirius psychologically to put him in the right place for the oncoming battle? Just a thought Deeby From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 18:51:15 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 18:51:15 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127717 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: But in many ways JKR's was more realistic. Death is often senseless -one minute your loved one or friend is healthy and alongside you and the next he's gone. > Death in battle isn't always glorious. I felt like JKR had conveniently overlooked something - the wretched Time Turner! Harry could have gone back in time just a couple of spins, fiddled around with something to influence the course of events before it all happened, and there you go - Sirius lives after all. Once the geni is out of the bottle, it's difficult to get it back in, isn't it? Sandra (still amazed at the happy Potter public) From mfterman at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 19:39:19 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:39:19 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127718 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" > Thanks for replying, and your answer was really interesting! I'm > not sure about me taking it to an extreme though, because I still > think Hogwartians are at a huge disadvantage. They spend 7 > years getting qualifications that seem to lead practically > nowhere. And exactly how does this differ from say, junior high school and high school in the United States? What good is a high school diploma except for getting into college? Actually, I can make a case that Hogwarts is actually more practical than junior high and high school in the United States. The main point of Hogwarts is to teach what I would call "magical literacy". By the time a student is out of Hogwarts they have a basic competance in a range of skills, from brewing potions to casting spells to handling magical plants and animals. What does a typical graduate of Hogwarts do? They go into some trade, where they will start learning more specialized potions, enchantments and other mundane skills. However the fact is that the Nimbus company doesn't have to train an incoming apprentice in the art of how to cast a spell or do a basic enchantment, any more than they have to train their new apprentice in how to read and write. The point of Hogwarts is to give a certain basic compentance in a common set of skills that all witches and wizards should be expected to know upon graduation, and frankly I give the Hogwarts graduates a much higher percentage of useful skills learned that they will continue to use for the rest of their life compared to what is taught in American high schools. mfterman From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 20:42:10 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:42:10 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader responce was Re: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127719 Phoenixgod: I am absolutely allowed to complain about any damn thing I want to. And I am absolutely allowed to be waiting with baited breath for the next book. I complain about books and shows that I love and want to see be the best they can be. I don't waste my time with books that I hate. I'm not a member of any John Knowles book lists because I think his books are steaming piles of you-know-what. I think Harry Potter is one of the most ingenious concepts for a book ever. and I want to enjoy to the ride. Part of the ride is saying what I did and did not like about the stories. I'm not going to stop, so learn to love the ride Alla: Agreed 100%. The reason why I love this list SO much is because there is a place for everything - well researcned canon investigations, speculations based on canon, complaints about anything canon related. If you do not like certain topics, my preferred solution is skipping them. Works wonders, really. :--) I LOVE the books and if I complain about them, it only means that i CARE enough to complain about them. This list is VERY diversed, I think. There is enough place to discuss everything in very different manners. I can only hope it will stay this way always. :-) JMO, Alla From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 18 21:09:22 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:09:22 -0000 Subject: Disappointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: <20050417222356.GF20194@4dot0.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127720 Geoff: There have been a number of posts recently picking holes in the books - including the purpose of Hogwarts itself and the inconsistency of the day of 1st September just to mention a couple. About eighteen months ago, I wrote about the problems arising when the combined intellects of the large membership of this group were brought to bear on the plotlines and story of Harry Potter. As a large group, we can analyse the story down to the last full stop and use a scalpel to dissect each paragraph but I think we need to realise that Jo Rowling is actually human and that parts of the storyline have not been fully realised, perhaps because she did not feel it was necessary. By way of example, I have already commented that she got the day of the week right for 1st September in 1991 - Harry's first journey to Hogwarts - and may not have troubled to calculate the weekday for succeeding years as there were more pressing plot ideas to develop. Again, on the subject of Hogwarts and its value in the Wizarding World, personally I have merely assumed that there are sections of wizard society and its structures which she has not fully described because they are not germane to the development of the story and also not known to Harry, whose POV is the main driving force. HPFGU must represent a formidable analytical engine for this series of books which I believe the author set out to write partly for her own satisfaction and enjoyment. If you have ever tried writing anything in the way of fiction, even for your own satisfaction and no one else's eyes, tidying up loose ends of the sort I have mentioned can be time-consuming and possibly unnecessary. We are not always able to tie up all the loose ends in real life. Bear in mind that an author like Tolkien was a perfectionist who went to great lengths to match up things like dates and phases of the moon in his books. It took him twelve years to write LOTR and get it to his satisfaction and something like 35 years had then elapsed since he first began putting his ideas down on paper in "The Book of Lost Tales". At the time of his death in 1973, he was still niggling away at various inconsistencies and contradictions in "The Silmarillion" and, when that was published in 1977, Christopher Tolkien had not managed to make the book read seamlessly. So let's give JKR a break. In about eight years, she has performed a magnificent task in persuading all the contributors on this list (and many others) to recognise her talent to hold us to the books and get us so involved with the characters of Harry's world that we get so involved, so excited, so analytical and sometimes so confrontational about the way in which our fictional friends conduct themselves. The books so far, and the coming two, may not always please us in their developments but let us keep a sense of proportion and enjoy these books as an escape to a world removed from global warming, Council Tax and (shh) General Elections! From tinglinger at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 21:24:10 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:24:10 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127721 deborahhbbrd If anyone can see further into the fog than I can - highly likely, I should think - I'll be most interested to read your suggestions. Deborah, fond of Lord P but fonder of Jane Austen and The Little White Horse [TLWH] tinglinger I found the works of Dorothy Sayers a tad hard to get into, and haven't seen any common threads or links to the Potter books. However, I am intrigued by your interest in TLWH, which imho contains many subtle and not so subtle links to the Potterverse and sets the tone as to how the the Harry Potter series will ultimately conclude. I have tried several times to start discussions on TLWH and how it relates to the Potter books in this group with minimal response and virtually no interest, so .... I have thus started my own yahoo group potterplots to present and discuss, among other things, how the books on JKR's bookshelves on her website parallel the plotlines of the Potter series. If you have read The Little White Horse you might be interested in checking out the site... (posts 17 and 18, with more soon to follow.) http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From 5682574 at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 18 03:32:55 2005 From: 5682574 at sbcglobal.net (Pat) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 03:32:55 -0000 Subject: Disappointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: <16803863.1113789093542.JavaMail.root@skeeter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127722 > Sherry: > (snip) I am so glad that JKR chose to share her story with > the world and take us along on the ride. But that doesn't > mean I have to like every single thing she does in the books. > (snip) > > It's ok to like and dislike certain parts, to be thrilled or > disappointed in the story and where it goes. to me, that's a > mark of how incredible the books really are, that they generate > so much feeling and involvement with readers, that we can feel > thrilled or disappointed in the outcome. That's part of why > they are so great! Pat: I agree with Sherry that you can love the books, and yet not like certain parts. I'd say I'm more afraid I might be disappointed over a few things. But even if Harry ends up with someone I currently can't see him with, I'm trusting that Jo can make me see it, especially since she's so good with explanations after the fact. Yeah, I have to admit the ships are the thing I'm most curious about. But only because I'm convinced I know how things will turn out for Harry and Dumbledore, so the ships are the next thing on the list for me. I feel sure she'll tell us everything we need to know about the Potters, and Voldemort, probably some in HBP and the rest in book 7. I guess the second thing I'm most curious about is Snape. So far, we can't tell which side he's really on, and what his background is, so I'm anxious for that. I also think there's a vampire in here somewhere, and just want that resolved. I, too, would feel let down if it all turned out to be a dream (some long dream!), and I have a small fear along those lines, due to something like "on the day our story begins" near the start of book 1. I'd also feel something was wrong if Harry's romance in book 6 is another temporary one. If he needs love to vanquish Voldemort, it needs to be well established, not new. And yes, I hope the giants are on our side, but also hope to hear little about it. I'm looking forward to more of Tonks. And I feel at some point, Dobby will rally the house-elves to help in the war, and I think that has some amusing potential. I also think Firenze may reveal more about Harry vs Voldemort, and hope the centaurs are on our side. Don't really want to read more about them fighting amongst themselves. Jo has said in 6 & 7 we will start getting answers instead of more questions, and that sounds great to me! Also want to know which way Draco will go, and if Neville will betray Harry like Peter betrayed James. I only jumped into fandom last August, so haven't seen very much of the discussion cycle. It's looking to me like the ships have been beaten to death. But the new territory seems to be that she's writing a hero's journey in alchemic symbolism. And if it's supposed to be a classic tradition in British literature, why is it so difficult to learn more about it? She said she felt she was writing something quite obscure (http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2000/1000-cnn-larryking.htm) and I believe this is why she said that. Lots to learn about the symbols and then to find them in the books. And if this is indeed what she has done, then I think she must be fit to burst after all these years and people are just starting to talk about this recently. It's truly amazing what she's hidden in here, and she can't say a thing about it until we've all digested the last book. From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 21:38:30 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 14:38:30 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050418213830.9147.qmail@web53908.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127723 sandra87b wrote: So I stand by my point - going to Hogwarts is a big step backwards for the kids, because JKR never thought out the credibility of the place. it should have been a summer camp, and nothing more. Lynn: Actually, Hogwarts sounds like a typical Muggle Middle and High School. Unless you go to a specialized high school, you don't come out of high school with the ability to do any specialized work. You still will need to go on to either university, technical school, or apprenticeship. It's there that you get your qualifications. Heck, many of my former classmates went on to college without any idea of what they finally wanted to do and it wasn't until their third year that they declared their major. So, I guess what you are saying is that the middle and high school we know today is nothing more than summer camp and we should abandon it becuase after all these centuries we still haven't thought through its purpose? Just because JKR hasn't filled out the magical world in a way you understand doesn't mean that there aren't many different employment opportunities available. Who says someone can't be an investment banker in the magical world. After all, we know that Bill works for Gringotts, first as a cursebreaker but he now works at home so I'm sure he's still not looking for treasure. He has to be doing other things as well. We know there has to be a whole manufacturing industry otherwise how would there be new sports equipment or cauldrons or quills and parchment. Perhaps it is just my imagination that allows me to see a full and complete magical world without JKR having to dot every i and cross every t for me to see it. Lynn __________________________________________________ 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 foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Apr 18 21:56:20 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:56:20 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127724 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > I felt like JKR had conveniently overlooked something - the > wretched Time Turner! Harry could have gone back in time just a > couple of spins, fiddled around with something to influence the > course of events before it all happened, and there you go - Sirius > lives after all. Once the geni is out of the bottle, it's difficult > to get it > back in, isn't it? > Pippin: I think JKR dealt with this, though I am sure nothing will satisfy those who think Sirius should have remained in the story. As Hermione tells us, one must not be seen to change time. I don't think this is merely a legal restriction. The endless travelling loop of the time turner cabinet, perpetually smashing and restoring itself suggests what can happen if Time Turners are misused. Would Harry risk a future where Sirius falls endlessly through the veil? Death's better, surely. Pippin From greatelderone at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 21:57:13 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 21:57:13 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127725 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > I felt like JKR had conveniently overlooked something - the > wretched Time Turner! Harry could have gone back in time just a > couple of spins, fiddled around with something to influence the > course of events before it all happened, and there you go - Sirius > lives after all. GEO: It would seem otherwise. The Time Turner is limited in its powers more specifically you can't alter what has already happened, any time turning you do has already occured and has been accounted for by time as seen in the Prisoner of Azkaban novel where the future version of Harry saves himself otherwise Dumbledore could have used it to kill Voldemort as a baby or vice versa? From Jen at alveymedia.com Mon Apr 18 04:58:49 2005 From: Jen at alveymedia.com (Jennifer Nielsen) Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 22:58:49 -0600 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127726 > Katrina: > I thought that Sirius's death was lame. > > I mean he was Harry's mentor/surrogate father/best friend and a > key character (I thought) for the future books and instead of > dying bravely in battle he falls through a doorway! > > I can hypothesise that JK may have been trying to demonstrate the > frailty of life or how the dead are still close to us. But I feel > that it could have been expressed in a more dramatic and fitting > way. I think the senselessness of his death is the point. I think I recall JKR talking once about her mother?s death, and how she was struck by the suddenness of it. I think she wanted kids to see that death isn?t always heroic, always a big event. Sometimes death is just random, senseless, and meaningless. I think if Sirius had a warrior?s death, it would have been easier for Harry. At least then, he?d have some place to put it emotionally. The way it is, he?s going to have a rough summer ahead. And one thing we can count on from JKR is that she rarely makes things easier for Harry. Jen From j_samudio at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 05:00:27 2005 From: j_samudio at hotmail.com (jomarelvy) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 05:00:27 -0000 Subject: Neville's wand Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127727 I don't know if this has ever been discussed here... Have you realized that all this time (the 5 books) Neville has been using his father's old wand? In Philosopher's Stone, when Harry is buying his wand, he's told by the wand expert and shop owner that if a wizard uses another wizard's wand, the results are not as satisfactory/effective as if using his own wand. After all it is the wand that chooses the wizard, right? "jomarelvy" From eggplant107 at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 06:58:45 2005 From: eggplant107 at hotmail.com (eggplant107) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 06:58:45 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127728 "lupinlore" Wrote: > Harry recovering too quickly and easily from > the various things that have happened. Also > Harry forgiving various people for various > things too easily. I strongly agree, I don't want Harry to ever forgive Snape, and perhaps not Dumbledore either. As for Voldemort I would really be disappointed if Harry ends up defeating him with kindness or some such politically correct thing, I want blood, I want Harry to get medieval on his ass. > Hermione not getting a much-needed lesson > in humility and understanding. I'm not sure I get you here, outside of Harry Hermione is my favorite character and if truth be told she has little to be humble about. > The Weasleys and Percy not reaching some > kind of resolution, whatever it may be. I certainly don't want them to kiss and make up, the best resolution would be for Percy to assume room temperature. > Seeing a great deal of Grawp. Grawp has potential, I'll bet he's smart but just uneducated. I'll bet Hermione recognizes that and tutors him. I'll bet we see Grawp debating with Hermione how the philosophy of Socrates differs from that of Ludwig Wittgenstein and exchanging witticisms as if it were a Noel Coward play. > Not learning that something exceedingly nasty > has come of Umbridge. Well.... we already know she was kidnapped by the Centaurs and according to mythology Centaurs are, ah, how can I put this delicately, a bit randy. Eggplant From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 08:48:27 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 08:48:27 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts should have been a summer camp. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127729 Following on from my original question regarding the point of why Hogwarts exists, I've come to the conclusion that it should have been nothing more than a summer camp. That way, JKR could have treated it like a place where certain kids learn responsibilities for their quirky magical abilities, and can still take part in the ordinary world afterwards. Instead, it's 7 years spent studying to wind up with a medieval education, a flair for party tricks, and a dismal start in life outside their school environment. So the whole school (and the few others like it) all fall victim to yet another 'little something' that has never been addressed. I feel that if a writer is going to create a world and set 7 books in it, it would be nice if that world had a smidgeon of purpose. I know I'm being pedantic, but I just keep on feeling like the Emperor has no clothes, and nobody else is willing to see that. I would have thought that one of the first things JKR would have wondered when she was imagining Harry getting his Hogwarts invitation is "Why would anyone go to a school for wizards - where would it lead them?". As often happens, she either didn't think of it, or simply didn't bother addressing it. And everyone is happy to miss it. To me, that just weakens the whole idea. Combine that with her happy disregard for simple logic on time travel (don't worry, I'm not starting that one up again!) and the easy changing of characters' intelligence (Dumbledore in book five), and I'm even less inclined to read book six. I feel like all the issues for HP could have been addressed in book one, and the rest is just one monstrously hyped bandwagon. Speaking of which, is anyone expecting another 100 million dollar law suit to be thrown around in July, to grab a few headlines? A couple of days before the release of book 5, a New York newspaper dared print some details of the story and the tv news ran huge stories about the massive, crippling lawsuit which was 'about to be served' for such an obscene act. So far I still haven't heard anything... have you? Sandra (with a sigh of despair at overhyped short stories) From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 09:05:02 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:05:02 -0000 Subject: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: <16803863.1113789093542.JavaMail.root@skeeter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127731 Potioncat: > If you are so sure you're going to be disappointed to tears, go > read a different book! > Sherry now: > Yes, I said that if it all turns out to be a dream, I would never > want to read future JKR works. Yes I reckon it's all a dream, Harry will step out of the shower and Hermione (Mrs Potter) will realise she's been studying too hard all night for her Open University degree, again. Do remember that JKR doesn't need to keep the public happy, and even when she did need to, she didn't always try. We've all proved time and again that we buy anything of hers by the truckload - sometimes because of a different cover - and she's made so much money that if the movies all bomb and the next two books sell one copy each, she's still laughing. But with a global marketing bandwagon to ride on, it's a great big joy ride for her and the sales are guaranteed by the million. I read in one of the more respectable newspapers (which is still no sign of credibility) that she's written under a different name, and the book sank without trace. I rest my case, if that's true. When the wheels are turning, some people get to choose when they step off. She's become one of them, and the public do give me the impression that they think she's some kind of god. Sandra (having a very weak decaff coffee...) From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 09:12:20 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:12:20 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127732 Steve wrote: > I'm not 100% entrenched in my idea, I'm only saying the > regardless ofhow Hagrid says it, being banned for having > and using a wand is effectively the same as being banned > from performing magic. Let's face it, the books are riddled with inconsistencies and loop holes, and very few people pick them up - especially the general public who still seem to worship every word. The book buying world (and film going world) are very forgiving to JKR. I'm not, and still dislike where JKR went with a childrens' book in TOoTP when Harry had to write lines which were carved into his hand. That was just plain sick, and messed up one of my friends' daughters for weeks. Sandra (getting indignant) From katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 09:28:32 2005 From: katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk (Katrina) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 09:28:32 -0000 Subject: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127733 Potioncat wrote: > Or stay on this list, but if you can't say something nice, > or something connected to canon, don't say anything at all. Katrina: You can like/love/adore the HP books without simpering over every word. There are parts of the HP series that are flawed and I would have thought that a discussion group would discuss the bad as well as the good points. From ajroald at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 20:00:25 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:00:25 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127734 Katrina wrote: > I thought that Sirius's death was lame. > > -Pause while you gasp with shock- > > I mean he was Harry's mentor/surrogate father/best friend and > a key character (I thought) for the future books and instead > of dying bravely in battle he falls through a doorway! > > I can hypothesise that JK may have been trying to demonstrate > the frailty of life or how the dead are still close to us. But > I feel that it could have been expressed in a more dramatic and > fitting way. You may be surprised to know that you aren't alone *no gasp from this reader*. IMHO, there was so much hype and speculation surrounding the death pre-release of OotP, that when I read the actual passage/event, it didn't live up to it all (kind of like a movie that gets rave reviews, and you sit in the theater and wonder what movie they actually saw). While his death scene seemed *lame* to me too, JKR must have had a reason to portray it the way she did. Since little is known about the veil, there are many possibilities. Could someone come back? Is there significance to falling through veil in the manner he did? We obviously haven't seen the last of the mysterious veil. ~ Lea From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Apr 18 22:23:40 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:23:40 -0000 Subject: OT deleted post Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127735 I deleted Post -730. Having another cup of chocolate. Geoff is such a good influence. Potioncat From jmrazo at hotmail.com Mon Apr 18 22:25:44 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:25:44 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127736 > > I strongly agree, I don't want Harry to ever forgive Snape, and > perhaps not Dumbledore either. As for Voldemort I would really be > disappointed if Harry ends up defeating him with kindness or some such > politically correct thing, I want blood, I want Harry to get medieval > on his ass. Amen brother! > > Hermione not getting a much-needed lesson > > in humility and understanding. > > I'm not sure I get you here, outside of Harry Hermione is my favorite > character and if truth be told she has little to be humble about. This, however, we need to work on :) phoenixgod2000 From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 20:29:29 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:29:29 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. Mfterman. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127737 mfterman wrote: > The point of Hogwarts is to give a certain basic competance > in a common set of skills that all witches and wizards should > be expected to know upon graduation, and frankly I give the > Hogwarts graduates a much higher percentage of useful skills > learned that they will continue to use for the rest of their > life compared to what is taught in American high schools. Which is a fair point, and eloquently made. The difference between a high school diploma and the OWLs etc from Hogwarts is that a diploma is a platform to anything you want to do, at any university. A Hogwarts list of qualifications only gives the holder access to a medieval world where spells and potions reign supreme - how very useful. The kids at Hogwarts may have a basic knowledge and skill set when they leave, but for what purpose? So they can go on to a bizarre university to study something that a medieval world requires... something which needs more than a flick of a wand to produce, more than a latin word to create... say what? And that brings me back to another point - what if one of the kids doesn't want to be in the wizard world? Say they like the muggle world and prefer to be there with all the modern pros and cons - they've got no qualifications to enable them to get to a muggle university and they're up a creek. The invitation to Hogwarts is potentially a poisoned chalice. JKR could have fleshed-out her world a bit more right at the start. Those muggle Hogwart kids know what life can be like in the muggle world - they know the convenience, they know the technological aspects, they know how their muggle world ticks over and therefore have a lot to 'miss' when they get drawn into the medieval world of Hogwarts. Non-muggles would hear about the muggle world... and perhaps wonder who's better off. Yes, there is a list of menial livelihoods which they can go on to do, and I think that just reinforces my point. Going to Hogwarts is a step backwards, a giant leap into a world trapped many centuries ago. Sandra (still not sleeping too good and hence thinking about this too much!) From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 20:42:23 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:42:23 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127738 If my sister took her kids out of school, she'd have to inform certain authorities, and demonstrate that they are receiving an education at either another school, or private tutorship. They would have to have exams and reach formal levels to show that everything is going well. So when, for example, the Potters and the Grangers send their Harry and Hermione off to Hogwarts, what do they tell the local authorities? Suddenly the kids aren't at school anywhere, and there's no record any longer of either of them getting an education. I assume the parents or guardians can still draw child benefit payments, so either England is an easy country to 'lose' your kids, or it's something else JKR overlooked. Or I did. I was just wondering about it, probably because I'm going through an insomnia phase, and these things become important at 3 in the morning! Sandra (who has now given up caffeine, as of this week) From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 22:05:13 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 15:05:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050418220513.64701.qmail@web30705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127739 > > wrote: > > I felt like JKR had conveniently overlooked > something - the > > wretched Time Turner! Harry could have gone back > in time just a > > couple of spins, fiddled around with something to > influence the > > course of events before it all happened, and there > you go - Sirius > > lives after all. > But using a time turner would have broken quite a few rules JUST to save Sirius. You simply can't use one of those on a whim. Besides where would Harry get one? It's not like in all the fuss after Sirius's death Harry could have gotten one, let alone thinking about the IDEA of getting one to rescue Sirius. IMHO Sirius's death serves to strenghten Harry emotionally and give him a reason to fight back. laurie From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Apr 19 00:04:06 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 00:04:06 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader response was Re: Disappointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127740 > Phoenixgod: > > I am absolutely allowed to complain about any damn thing I > want to. > > And I am absolutely allowed to be waiting with baited breath for the > next book. > Alla: > > Agreed 100%. The reason why I love this list SO much is because there > is a place for everything - well researcned canon investigations, > speculations based on canon, complaints about anything canon related. snip > I LOVE the books and if I complain about them, it only means that i > CARE enough to complain about them. > > This list is VERY diversed, I think. There is enough place to discuss > everything in very different manners. Potioncat: (after the chocolate) Absolutely. I never meant to say that a Harry Potter fan shouldn't discuss different aspects of the books. Nor does a fan have to like every detail of the books, but they do need to like the books. Talk about plot development,or lack thereof. Give your opinion of who's cuter: Ron or Harry or who is sexier: Rosmerta or Bellatrix. Discuss whether certain characters are fleshed out or flat, whether a plot device worked, whether something was or was not supported within the canon. Discuss whether the book followed the rules of the genre. Discuss(your idea here) Make predictions, take chances get messy...oops wrong fantasy book. This group has always been one that calls its members to a high standard of posting. We'll request the canon, counter with other examples and make the best point possible to agree with or disagree with the post. After a round of good hearted disagreement, we'll share a mug of something...having come to an understanding or having agreed to disagree. We do it because we like the books and we like to discuss the books and we're open to other ideas. But this is not a site for people who do not like the books. If you just want to trash Harry Potter, this isn't the place. The very friend who talked me into reading Harry Potter has lost interest. The books became too dark for her. She didn't like PoA and she never read OoP. But she doesn't complain, she simply moved on. So I understand something along the line of "I'll be very upset if Susan Bones dies." But I don't understand "If Susan Bones dies, this series will really suck and I'll never read another book again. Even if I did like it up to now. because I didn't get my money's worth." I'll even agree with "If Susan Bones dies I'll be upset because there was no foreshadowing..." Heck, if anyone could just say anything at this site, we'd have someone warning us of the danger of reading a book about witchcraft. And telling us where we were headed if we continued. Who wants to get into that? Potioncat who hopes this is well said, but has to go now. From ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com Tue Apr 19 00:18:33 2005 From: ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com (ReturnOfTheMutt at aol.com) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:18:33 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. Message-ID: <199.3d6ead0c.2f95a859@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127741 In a message dated 4/18/2005 3:11:48 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk writes: Say Hermione had to go back to her parents after finishing at Hogwarts, due to sudden illnesses and infirmities or whatever - then what? She can't go to a muggle university because she has no recognised qualifications, and getting a job would be difficult because the only kind she could get would be the kind that require no formal certificates - and that would probably make her brain explode. So I stand by my point - going to Hogwarts is a big step backwards for the kids, because JKR never thought out the credibility of the place. it should have been a summer camp, and nothing more. Sandra. Harry went to a Muggle school when he was a child. His parents were a witch and a wizard. He most likely was born among magical people. I'm not 100% sure how they do it in England, but in America, when you want to attend school, you need proof of who you are. If Harry wasn't born in a muggle hospital he wouldn't have a muggle birth certificate. I think that official magical documents look like ordinary muggle documents to muggles. If you're a muggle and you look at a wizards diploma or certification or anything like that, you'd see a muggle equivalent. It goes in with the laws against muggles knowing. Nobody wants a muggle to come across a wizards report card and see that they're taking potions and flying. To a muggle, it would look like chemistry and gym. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 00:28:17 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 00:28:17 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127742 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eggplant107" wrote: > I strongly agree, I don't want Harry to ever forgive Snape, and > perhaps not Dumbledore either. As for Voldemort I would really be > disappointed if Harry ends up defeating him with kindness or some such > politically correct thing, I want blood, I want Harry to get medieval > on his ass. GEO: Then I think you're most likely going to be disappointed. Love, pity, forgiveness and all that other crap seems to be the ideas that Rowling wants to get across. Afterall it was the love and self- sacrifice of Lily that defeated Voldemort the first time, no doubt in the end the pity/forgiveness/love of Harry shall rule the fate of many not to mention defeat the Dark Lord considering how Rowling has emphasized how Harry is filled with love while Voldemort has none or he wouldn't be in his current condition. From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Apr 19 00:34:21 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 00:34:21 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader response was Re: Disappointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127743 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > > We do it because we like the books and we like to discuss the books > and we're open to other ideas. But this is not a site for people who > do not like the books. If you just want to trash Harry Potter, this > isn't the place. The very friend who talked me into reading Harry > Potter has lost interest. The books became too dark for her. She > didn't like PoA and she never read OoP. But she doesn't complain, she > simply moved on. Certainly I understand what you are saying. However, I don't recall reading anything from anyone who doesn't like the Harry Potter books, or at least some aspect of them. As to "trashing the books," if you mean by that severely criticizing them, I'm afraid that you're in for a lot of discomfort. The fact is that many people who like many things about HP still think that JKR has made several bad mistakes. These people have EVERY right to express themselves in this forum. If it makes you upset, I'm sorry, but it isn't going to stop. Keeping your mouth shut and moving on is perfectly legitimate if that is your decision and consistent with your beliefs. Talking about what you object to and what has disappointed you is also perfectly legitimate. Not complaining is not in and of itself a virtue. It is a way of responding that is favored by certain people with certain personalities. Discussing one's dislikes and disappointments is another response favored by other people with different personalities. And it is a perfectly legitimate and acceptable response. > > So I understand something along the line of "I'll be very upset if > Susan Bones dies." But I don't understand "If Susan Bones dies, this > series will really suck and I'll never read another book again. Even > if I did like it up to now. because I didn't get my money's worth." > > I'll even agree with "If Susan Bones dies I'll be upset because there > was no foreshadowing..." Well, simply because you do not understand it does not make it an illegitimate position. I dare say we have all run across positions or postings we don't understand. They are still perfectly legitimate. > > Heck, if anyone could just say anything at this site, we'd have > someone warning us of the danger of reading a book about witchcraft. > And telling us where we were headed if we continued. Who wants to get > into that? I would have no objection to that kind of post at all, providing it actually tied into the HP books. If someone said, for instance, that the character of Voldemort represents the dangers of fooling with witchcraft because of such and such reasons, that would be a perfectly legitimate posting. I wouldn't agree with it. I would even find it very odd indeed. But I would never say it isn't legitimate, any more than I would ever say that a post specifically linking Harry's character to models of Christian behavior is not legitimate. There is absolutely no requirement on this site or any other that I know of to say nice things about the books, or to be positive about their message, or to be admiring of JKR. I think practically everyone on the list has done all three at some time or another, but there is no requirement to do any such things. I'm sorry that you find some kinds of posts distressing. But you are overstepping yourself very badly to say that they are not legitimate posts, or that these are not opinions that should be expressed on this forum, or that these subjects are not appropriate for HPfGU. If you think that you have a case, then take it up with the list elves. Trying to castigate an entire segment of posters online will do no good whatsoever. Lupinlore From sherriola at earthlink.net Tue Apr 19 00:41:52 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 17:41:52 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Allowable reader response was Re: Disappointed in Potter? Message-ID: <16979711.1113871312414.JavaMail.root@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127744 Potioncat: (after the chocolate) Absolutely. I never meant to say that a Harry Potter fan shouldn't discuss different aspects of the books. Nor does a fan have to like every detail of the books, but they do need to like the books. So I understand something along the line of "I'll be very upset if Susan Bones dies." But I don't understand "If Susan Bones dies, this series will really suck and I'll never read another book again. Even if I did like it up to now. because I didn't get my money's worth." Sherry now Ok, i'm the one who said that if it ended up being a dream, i'd never wanted to read another book of JKR's. that isn't saying that I dislike the books or feel i've wasted money or even time and emotional commitment to them. In fact, it's a ridiculously silly reason, but here goes. As a very little girl, i was traumatized by the ending of the movie the Wizard of Oz. Ok, maybe traumatized is too strong a word, but even now, many years later, I can remember my terrible disappointment at the ending. Oz didn't exist, not even for Dorothy. it was all a concussion based dream. wow! Talk about feeling devastated. I know that's crazy, but that's how it affected me. So, i would feel terribly disappointed if the same thing happened with Harry Potter, unless he woke up into a far better world than the one of his dreams. And even if he did, ... well, i don't think I'd be very happy about it. I probably would not feel like I wanted to read future books by JKR, because I would think that she would not be likely to take future stories in directions that would leave me feeling satisfied after the read. that still isn't meant to be critical of her, just to say i would not want to follow her down that road. She must write to please herself, even if it doesn't please me in the end. But I would still love all that led up to it. And I'd probably still read Harry Potter over and over again, up to the point of him waking from the dream! I think that whenever an artist, be it author, singer, actor/director, captures the hearts or interest of the fans, sometimes it's great forever and sometimes not. I've certainly had the experience of really loving the music of some singer or a band, but after several albums, the singer changes direction and style. I might not like the new style and might not continue to follow their career or to purchase new music. But I would still love the original things that hooked me in the first place. And besides all that, I have confidence that JKR is going to make the next two books so wonderful and satisfying, that whatever she does with them, most of us will be completely with her and reveling in it all. After all, she's done a great job of it so far. Sherry From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 01:06:57 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 01:06:57 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader response was Re: Disappointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: <16979711.1113871312414.JavaMail.root@daisy.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127745 >> Sherry now > > Ok, i'm the one who said that if it ended up being a dream, i'd never wanted to read another book of JKR's. that isn't saying that I dislike the books or feel i've wasted money or even time and emotional commitment to them. In fact, it's a ridiculously silly reason, but here goes. As a very little girl, i was traumatized by the ending of the movie the Wizard of Oz. Ok, maybe traumatized is too strong a word, but even now, many years later, I can remember my terrible disappointment at the ending. Oz didn't exist, not even for Dorothy. it was all a concussion based dream. wow! Talk about feeling devastated. I know that's crazy, but that's how it affected me. So, i would feel terribly disappointed if the same thing happened with Harry Potter, unless he woke up into a far better world than the one of his dreams. And even if he did, ... well, i don't think I'd be very happy about it. I probably would not feel like I wanted to read future books by JKR, because I would think that she would not be likely to take future stories in directions that would leave me feeling satisfied after the read. that still isn't meant to be critical of her, just to say i would not want to follow her down that road. She must write to please herself, even if it doesn't please me in the end. But I would still love all that led up to it. And I'd probably still read Harry Potter over and over again, up to the point of him waking from the dream! Alla: Sherry, in my opinion you do NOT have to justify your unwillingness to reread the books if the ending turned out to be the dream one. In fact, in my opinion you do not have to justify ANY opinion about the books - positive or negative. I love the books dearly and I have MUCH more positive to say about them then negative ( in fact, my opinions of first four books consist primarily of my love for them), but I absolutely refuse to stop expressing my negative opinions, because someone does not like them. Yes, I probably will not feel comfortable if I were to read the total trashing the books, but frankly to me the right to express the opinion is much more important than the fact that I may not like what I read . As long as of course I am not reading personal attacks towards other posters. Yes, if Harry dies at the end, I most likely will not read the books again. Does it make me less of the fan? I think not. I will still cherish the books and introduce them to my kids, but because of the fact that I identify with Harry's character quite strongly, it will be simply quite depressing for me to reread all Harry's trials and tribulations knowing that no happy ending will follow. Suppose though that someone decides to take stronger position and say that because of that particular plot twist books are bad works of literature. Does it mean that such person should not be allowed to say it? I don't think so. Sherry: > And besides all that, I have confidence that JKR is going to make the next two books so wonderful and satisfying, that whatever she does with them, most of us will be completely with her and reveling in it all. After all, she's done a great job of it so far. Alla: I completely agree with you. JMO, Alla From jmrazo at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 01:15:58 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 01:15:58 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127746 In the interest of saying some positive things about HP I have composed a partial list of things I like about Harry Potter. Enjoy 1. Harry is an awesome character. 2. Animagi are a neat concept. 3. I've never met james and lily potter and I already love them. 4. Voldemort is an intertaining villian. Very Evil Overlord Like. 5. Sirius. 6. Dobby. 7. Every last one of the Weasley males :) 8. The Triwizard Tournament. 9. Metamorphmagi and Tonks. 10. the real Mad-eye moody. 11. The fake mad-eye moody (ferret-boy Draco! Heehee) 12. Hating Draco Malfoy is very satisfying. 13. Hating Snape is very satisfying. 14. Pre-OOTP Dumbledore. 15. Luna Lovegood doing almost anything. 16. Especially sitting sidesaddle on a thestral. 17. Susan Bones. Me likey her last name. 18. Dumbledore fighting lame aurors. 19. the talk in front of the mirror of Erisod between Harry and Dumbledore. 20. Harry being a good teacher. 21. Bellatrix Lestrange has sparked my interest as a villian. magical dominatrix mmmmm.... 22-29. Fleur Delacour. I have a crush on her something bad. The combination of sexy accent and unearthy beauty? How can I resist? 30. The world of Harry Potter is so interesting and so filled with promise I'm going to be writing fan fic for that world for the rest of my life. phoenixgod2000 out! From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Mon Apr 18 22:10:34 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:10:34 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? The Dursleys were right. In-Reply-To: <20050418213830.9147.qmail@web53908.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127747 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ladi lyndi wrote: > So, I guess what you are saying is that the middle and high school we know today is nothing more than summer camp and we should abandon it becuase after all these centuries we still haven't thought through its purpose? Sandra replies: .......and that misses my point. Middle and High schools educate students to give them a platform for any number of university courses and in turn, jobs. The kids leave Hogwarts with a very limited range of options ahead of them (as you put it yourself with your own job suggestions), and in my view, a thoroughly medieval path to tread. If you read one or two of my other replies, you'll see this in more detail. I'm sure the regulator-elves here won't appreciate me repeating myself a lot! Neither would I, come to think of it. >Lynn also wrote: Perhaps it is just my imagination that allows me to see a full and complete magical world without JKR having to dot every i and cross every t for me to see it. > Sandra replies: Creating an imaginary world can make for a good book as a one-off, but stretch it out to seven and the gaps really show unless, like Tolkein, there's a huge amount of respect for the readers. But these days the public's attitude seems to be "Who cares, just read it, it's Harry Potter - hooray!!!," which is exactly what a Marketing Department dreams of. My main point here is that in order for the wizard world to be the setting for this series of books, it just needs a little credibility which could have been tackled in the first book. But the actual purpose of them being there has ever been addressed, and I probably wouldn't have given this a second thought if careers hadn't been so flippantly touched upon in the stories. So try and understand that I'm not undermining the stories by wondering what the whole point of training to be a wizard is, I'm just trying to see what lies ahead for the mighty Harry once his years at Hogwarts are over and done with. I see Hogwarts equipping its students with very little - and hence the invitation to the school in book one deserves all the derision that the Dursleys heaped upon it. There - I've said it. Sandra (seeing it in a different light these days) From hambtty at triad.rr.com Mon Apr 18 22:57:53 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:57:53 -0000 Subject: Neville's wand Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127748 "jomarelvy": > I don't know if this has ever been discussed here... > Have you realized that all this time (the 5 books) Neville has been > using his father's old wand? In Philosopher's Stone, when Harry is > buying his wand, he's told by the wand expert and shop owner that if > a wizard uses another wizard's wand, the results are not as > satisfactory/effective as if using his own wand. After all it is > the wand that chooses the wizard, right? I've been thinking about that too. Wonder if he was given the wand so his abilities wouldn't show up too soon and spoil "The Plan". We know DD/OP has a plan, he has said so. DD's caring about Harry too much has interfered with "The Plan". I think Neville is a major player in that plan. And Neville's toad, Trevor, is no ordinary toad - a protector from the OP or a spy from LV's camp. Trevor is always missing, where is he? Spying on Harry? or watching out for Harry? -B.G. From mfterman at yahoo.com Mon Apr 18 23:05:34 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 23:05:34 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. Mfterman. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127749 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > Which is a fair point, and eloquently made. The difference > between a high school diploma and the OWLs etc from Hogwarts is > that a diploma is a platform to anything you want to do, at any university. A Hogwarts list of qualifications only gives the > holder access to a medieval world where spells and potions > reign supreme - how very useful. I would prefer to disagree. A diploma isn't much of a platform to do anything you want to do. A diploma by itself doesn't count for all that much. Frankly there's little difference between requiring OWL scores to qualify for certain jobs and having to score on a battery of standardized tests and maintaining a GPA score to get into certain colleges/universities. Sandra: > The kids at Hogwarts may have a basic knowledge and skill set > when they leave, but for what purpose? So they can go on to a > bizarre university to study something that a medieval world > requires... something which needs more than a flick of a wand > to produce, more than a latin word to create... say what? They are experienced in basic spellcasting skills and potionmaking skills, which are a prerequisite for almost any job that they want in the wizarding world. [Actually, my real beef with Hogwarts is that JKR has set up a completely unrealistic class list for her students. The classes that Harry takes are driven more by narrative conventions than any sort of realism. More realistically, Harry should have an English class, a Latin class, maybe a Math class, and Care of Magical Creatures, Herbology and Astronomy be optional electives] Sandra: > And that brings me back to another point - what if one of the kids > doesn't want to be in the wizard world? Say they like the muggle > world and prefer to be there with all the modern pros and cons - > they've got no qualifications to enable them to get to a muggle > university and they're up a creek. The invitation to Hogwarts is > potentially a poisoned chalice. JKR could have fleshed-out her > world a bit more right at the start. Well, that is one of the issues that JKR hasn't bothered to address. On the other hand, that doesn't mean that Hogwarts isn't recognized as an accredited school in the Muggle world. Remember that one of the students at Hogwarts was planning on going to Eton. I suspect there's also the fact that Hogwarts being an accredited school in the (Muggle) school system avoids eyebrows raised at all these (Muggle) kids suddenly not going to (Muggle) schools. Sandra: > Those muggle Hogwart kids know what life can be like in the > muggle world - they know the convenience, they know the > technological aspects, they know how their muggle world ticks > over and therefore have a lot to 'miss' when they get drawn into > the medieval world of Hogwarts. Non-muggles would hear about > the muggle world... and perhaps wonder who's better off. > Yes, there is a list of menial livelihoods which they can go on > to do, and I think that just reinforces my point. Going to > Hogwarts is a step backwards, a giant leap into a world trapped > many centuries ago. On the flip side, imagine having a powerful magical talent and not being able to use it at all. Imagine a life living in the closet, keeping your existance a secret from others. Not being able to talk to people or being able to use your most precious gift. And for that matter, a world filled with magic often has conveniences that the Muggle world lacks. The Floo network and Apparation beat Muggle transportation methods down cold, for example. Yes, JKR could have thought things out better, but even with what she has, the issues are not all that clear cut. For example, high amounts of magic blow technology out (hence no technology at Hogwarts). It's not clear what the threshhold level is. Now if you're a wizard, would you prefer to live with a high concentration of magic where your own gift can act freely and you've got conveniences working from magic instead of electronics, or would you cripple yourself for the sake of Muggle technology, which doesn't offer any real advantages? mfterman From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 02:29:00 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 02:29:00 -0000 Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127750 Steve: As far as magic, in Hagrid's case, his magical education was stopped before he had his qualifications, and his wand was broken. So, I'm not so sure that Hagrid is banned from doing magic, he is banned from having and using a wand which in effect is the same as a ban on most magic. Bookworm: According to Hagrid, himself, he is not allowed to use magic: (PS/SS, Ch4) [after giving Dudley a pig's tail] "... "I'm ? er ? not supposed ter do magic, strictly speakin'. ... " bboyminn: The point I'm making, though I'm not insisting on it, is that being banned from having and using a wand, for most wizards, and especially the poorly educated Hagrid, is essentially the same as being banned from magic; No wand = No Magic. This is true with only a few rare exceptions which would be unlikely to apply to Hagrid. Because a vast majority of magic requires a wand, Hagrid is banned from doing magic by not being allowed a wand. As far as what Hagrid said, the 'What' is the same in your version and mine, it's only the 'Why' that is different. Bookworm continues: I guess it's a matter of semantics. To me, the difference is like a drunk driver being told he cannot drive a car (cannot use magic), and having his license taken away (having his wand broken). The second is a physical act, the first is a legal matter. Hagrid didn't say he `cannot' do magic (because his wand was broken); he specifically said he is "not supposed to do magic", as in he doesn't have permission whether or not he has the ability. And obviously his broken wand hasn't entirely prevented his use of magic. bboyminn: I don't think that's quite right. There is no 'graduation' in the UK, and it's true wizards like Fred and George don't need qualifications to use magic, they only need be of age. In Britain, the G.C.S.E. (O-Level, A-Level) exams are your qualifications. They are what you bring to a job interview to establish your abilities. Further, in both the USA and in the UK, once you reach a certain age, you are allowed to quit school; school is no longer compulsory. That age is typically 16. So, I'm not 100% sure of what you are getting at in this one point. Did you misspeak or did I misinterpret? Bookworm: I was responding to your phrase <>. I'm not familiar with O-Levels and A-Levels, so I didn't think of them in terms of qualifications. My interpretation compared `qualifications' with `requirements' then my thoughts jumped to `graduation requirements'. My error. Ravenclaw Bookworm From juli17 at aol.com Tue Apr 19 02:54:15 2005 From: juli17 at aol.com (juli17 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 22:54:15 EDT Subject: Disapointed in Potter? Message-ID: <1ed.3a1de449.2f95ccd7@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127751 Sandra wrote: > Do remember that JKR doesn't need to keep the public happy, > and even when she did need to, she didn't always try. Julie: It's not JKR's job to keep the public happy. She's a writer, and writers write what's in their hearts, what inspires them, what gets into their heads and won't get out until they put it down on paper (or type it out on a keyboard). Certainly most want others to love what they write, and want to be successful at it. JKR no doubt exceeded her wildest dreams on that score. But, as she said before, and it's true of most writers, she writes for *herself.* She tells the story that's in her, and leaves the public to like or dislike it (as she must). Julie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From siskiou at vcem.com Tue Apr 19 02:56:22 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:56:22 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's wand In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1996575782.20050418195622@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127752 Hi, Monday, April 18, 2005, 3:57:53 PM, B.G. wrote: > Wonder if he was given the wand so > his abilities wouldn't show up too soon and spoil "The Plan". This same story line fell kind of flat with Ron. Nothing seemed to change for him after receiving his own wand, though it seemed to be about the same as the one that was broken. We'll see how it works out for Neville when he gets his own wand. I like Neville the way he is and hope he isn't going to turn into SuperWizard, just as I hope the brain incident doesn't change Ron too much. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 03:00:46 2005 From: Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com (unicorn_72) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 03:00:46 -0000 Subject: Why Snape Hates Neville (Another New Wild Hare theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127753 > > Sabrina wrote: > > I was wondering if the reason as for Snape hating Neville, and Harry > has to do with who is "the one." > This may also explain why Snape is so much more horrible to Harry. Not > only because of his gripe with James Potter, but also because he knows > that Harry is not "the one." KarentheUnicorn's Reply: Ok so maybe it might not be new, this is probably the dumbest Idea/theory I've had, but I was thinking about why Professor Snape would hate Neville. Now, I'm not sure of the ages of the Longbottoms? Alice and Frank, there is no mention of there ages so, is not sure how well this theory holds up, but, I'll just toss it out and see what everyone thinks. A lot of people have had theories that Snape is in love with Lily, ok, so, what if he was in love with someone else. What if Alice and Frank are the same ages as Lily and James, and were in school with that whole group? What if it was actually Alice he might have been in love with? And she rejected him and maybe even humiliated him, after all he was supposed to be All deep into the dark arts at that time, and Alice and Frank became well respected Aurors, so I would think in school they might have been very against the DA's. So, to me if something like that happened, I think Snape is the kind of person that doesn't take being humiliated lightly, Obviously from his grudge against James Potter. So, I guess you would say same theory different Girl (laughs) My other Theory on why he hates sweet ol' Neville so much, maybe because perhaps, Neville may remind Snape of himself in school his first few years at Hogwarts, its possible at 11 years of age, Snape could have been very awkward, though we do have Sirius saying he knew more curses than a 7th year, but that doesn't mean he was good at every subject in school, and it also doesn't show how well he dealt with a school setting. Perhaps he is called Snivillus because...he cried and missed hims mum? "aww...poor Snivillus misses his mummy" I think some have had the theory that Snivillus might mean that he was a snitch and kept following Jame's and his group around, but when I hear Snivil, I think of Crying...someone crying...but maybe thats just me..meh. Meh, I'm just sorta pondering this out, perhaps Snape does not like to see weakness because he see's weakness in his own self, so if he see's it in others he can not stand it. I'm not sure if I have that theory figured right yet. I was just reminded that, a lot of times I notice children argue with a parent who is very much like them more than they do with the parent they are less similar to....so I was just wondering if we have a case of him seeing himself in Harry and Neville, and wanting to surpress it by lashing out at what he sees. Maybe Snape has a case of not liking himself, maybe secretly he wants to be a Griffendor? Maybe Secretly that is why he followed James, Sirius, and Lupin around, because he wanted to be like them and be accepted, but since he was a Slytherine and a little bit of a oddball, if he hung out with Griffendor's he would be humiliated by both groups. So, maybe when he got in fights with James, he just learned to hate Griffendor because it was what he wanted...and maybe he doesn't even realize it...(laughs at own second wild theory) Ok, thats enough of my crazy theories..meh, how'd I do? (hehe) KarentheUnicorn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 03:15:26 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 03:15:26 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127754 Phoenixgod 2000: In the interest of saying some positive things about HP I have composed a partial list of things I like about Harry Potter. Enjoy 30. The world of Harry Potter is so interesting and so filled with promise I'm going to be writing fan fic for that world for the rest of my life. Alla: I think I mentioned it to you in off list message, but I am going to repeat it here. I think it was a stroke of genuis on JKR's part to create the world which exists parallel to "real" world, not "separate" magical world. It is SO much easier to imagine escaping to 'Potterverse" because of that. Just take a flight to London and find Diagon alley. :-) I want to add some items to your list. 31. Trio's friendship. I honestly think that JKR created one of the most touching friendship in literature , children or otherwise. To me, those three really balance each other out , love each other, fight with each other just as real friends should. When I think about them that way, I really prefer not to see any romance inside the Trio ( although I do think that text is going Ron/Hermione). I just want them to survive the war and enjoy peaceful times. :-) 32. Remus Lupin. I cannot believe that at one point of my "potterholic" career I considered Remus to be a boring character. 33. Last but definitely not the least. Weasley' females. You knew I was going to say that. :-) JMO, Alla From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Tue Apr 19 03:17:21 2005 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 03:17:21 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127755 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > > Lupinlore wrote: > > I saw this question on another site and thought I'd try it out > here. > > What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? My > > list includes: > > > > > Hannah: > As I said in another post, the only thing that would really > disappoint me about HBP is if it was badly written with poor > explanations and plot holes etc. That would also be my number one concern. My number two concern is that I'll be unable to derive any filk songs out of it. But seriously, I would be greatly disappointed if: 1) Draco becoming a good guy: this "detour" of his better not smack of anything redemptive 2) Sirius was bought back to life - although many on the group are rooting for his miraculous return to flesh and blood, I think it would "gravely" weaken the credibility of JKR's narrative if she were to do this, implying that no catastrophe is really that bad, and all can be quickly reversed by authorial fiat (I don't think we're going to see him as a ghost, though I could live with that). 3) If JKR starts channeling Alfonso Cuaron and inserts blatantly political and/or social commentary into the text. 4) If Hagrid dies 5) If one of the Weasleys doesn't (not that I hate the Weasleys - it's just that the logic of the narrative demands it - most likley 'twill be Molly or one of the twins) 6) If the issue of Snape is clearly resolved - that is, is he truly on the side of DD or the DEs? An evil-doer of good, or just an evil- doer? One of the great sources of narrative tension in the series has been Snape's ambiguity, and it would be a mistake to resolve that tension before the end of the series. 7) If we see the return of Hidden-Hand!Voldemort. While keeping a low profile may have been necessary for the Dark Lord in Book Five, I hope that he will manifest himself in Book Six in other ways besides nocturnal transmissions over the Potter Dream Network. 8) If we don't find out what happened to Ludo Bagman or Igor Karkaroff (this might be postponed till Book Seven, & I could handle that) 9) If Harry gets back with Cho (nothing against her, but she's not that interesting a character) 10) If JKR concealed the identity of the HBP by lying to us before ("How could INSERTNAME be the HBP?" exclaimed Harry, "Both of his parents were purebloods!" "Well, you see, Harry," sighed Dumbledore,"INSERTNAME'S mother was a brave and powerful witch, but she was also a bit of a slut. So, one evening, while her husband was at a Warlocks' convention, this Muggle traveling salesman knocked on her front door.....") - CMC From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Apr 19 03:29:17 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 03:29:17 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader response was Re: Disappointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127756 Potioncat, I've chosen this post to respond to because there is so much here I agree with. Many of my comments are connected to specific things Sherry and Alla have written, and a few are generated by other posts in this thread. Snipping here and there. > >> Sherry now > > > > Ok, i'm the one who said that if it ended up being a dream, i'd > never wanted to read another book of JKR's. that isn't saying that > I dislike the books or feel i've wasted money or even time and > emotional commitment to them. Potioncat: If it turns out to be a dream (although I don't know why that comes up so often) I will be disapointed. If Harry dies, I probably wouldn't want to re-read the books either. Although I've re-read King Arthur books many times, and he dies every time. But like you, Sherry, I wouldn't say "Oh, what a horrible set of books this was!" look at all the Sirius fans who have stuck with the story. Sherry: As a very little girl, i was traumatized by > the ending of the movie the Wizard of Oz. Potioncat: I understand that. I was very upset that my young children saw "Hook". Silly me, I didn't want them to think of Peter Pan growing up before they did. Sherry: I probably would not feel > like I wanted to read future books by JKR, because I would think > that she would not be likely to take future stories in directions > that would leave me feeling satisfied after the read. that still > isn't meant to be critical of her, just to say i would not want to > follow her down that road. She must write to please herself, even if > it doesn't please me in the end. But I would still love all that > led up to it. And I'd probably still read Harry Potter over and > over again, up to the point of him waking from the dream! Potioncat: Yes, Yes. This is what I'm getting at! If a book doesn't please us we can choose to stop reading it, or to avoid the author. We can say, gee, I really didn't like how that developed. And as fans we can say that now and we can discuss those issues now. That wasn't my objection. > > Alla: > > Sherry, in my opinion you do NOT have to justify your unwillingness > to reread the books if the ending turned out to be the dream one. In > fact, in my opinion you do not have to justify ANY opinion about the > books - positive or negative. Potioncat: I agree with that. Opinion does not have to be justified. For the purpose of discussion, someone else may bring in canon or lit crit theories to counter. And after all, the rest of the world thinks we're crazy for re-reading the books at all! > Alla: > I love the books dearly and I have MUCH more positive to say about > them then negative ( in fact, my opinions of first four books > consist primarily of my love for them), but I absolutely refuse to > stop expressing my negative opinions, because someone does not like > them. Potioncat: To me the fact that you love the books or like the books is the key. My point was that there are posts that sound as if the writer does not like the books at all. Perhaps the writer didn't write very well. Or perhaps I didn't read very well. > Alla: > Yes, I probably will not feel comfortable if I were to read the > total trashing the books, but frankly to me the right to express the > opinion is much more important than the fact that I may not like > what I read . As long as of course I am not reading personal attacks > towards other posters. > Suppose though that someone decides to take stronger position and > say that because of that particular plot twist books are bad works > of literature. Does it mean that such person should not be allowed > to say it? I don't think so. Potioncat: But do you really think this is the place for that? If a person thought the HP books were bad literature why would they post on a HP fan site unless it was to stir things up for no good purpose? There are better ways to stir things up! A general book site, a letter to the editor would be good choices for a non-fan. I gave the example on a different post of a person who believes HP lead to a comfort with the idea of witches that will lead to eternal damnation and worse. That person has a right to believe that and to say that. But I don't think that person should post here. That's sort of the more general point I'm trying to make. I certainly am not saying only posts "I" agree with are valid. Or that I have to like every post that comes out. Or only positive things should be said. Trashing doesn't belong here (IMHO) Critiquing does. > > > Sherry: > > And besides all that, I have confidence that JKR is going to make > the next two books so wonderful and satisfying, that whatever she > does with them, most of us will be completely with her and reveling > in it all. After all, she's done a great job of it so far. > > > Alla: > > I completely agree with you. Potioncat: Me too. I'm going to take at least a 24 hour moratorium on this topic. And I hope we all have lots of hot chocolate. From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 04:07:16 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 04:07:16 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127757 Hey, I'll go along with this ... these are random, as I think of them, in no particular order. 1. Harry's undiminshed "sense of wonder" at the Wizarding World. (It's worth noting that although Hermione is also new to that world, she never seems surprised, impressed, or even interested in things which she's never seen before. And compare with the muggle-born Creevey boys.) 2. The lavish descriptions of food at Hogwarts, the Burrow, Florean's Ice Cream Parlor ... 3. Dumbledore kicking the posteriors of four Ministry wizards in OotP. 4. Bill and Charley jousting with tables in mid-air at the Burrow. 5. The entire Quidditch outing, until the Death Eaters got drunk and ruined it for everybody. 6. The moment when we realize that Mrs. Figg is not what she seems. 7. The Amazing Bouncing Ferret. ("Moody! How cool is he?") Even knowing the truth, I still love it. 8. The dialogue with the wizards who came to get Harry in OotP. ("Better wizards than you have lost buttocks, you know!" "Who do you know who's lost a buttock?" "Never you mind!") (Moody walks with difficulty. It may be because he has a wooden leg. Or it may not.) 9. Ron's sense of humor. 10. Lupin's teaching style. Janet Anderson (who's doing those quotes from memory, so if they're wrong that's why) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 04:28:45 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 04:28:45 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127758 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > I saw this question on another site and thought I'd try it out here. > What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? Tonks: 1. I don't want DD to die. ;-( 2. I want to find out more about what happened at GH. And what Snape did as a DE. 3. I don't what any more of Grawp. (I agree with Lupinlore here too.) 4. I want to see Harry mature to the point that he can have compassion on Snape and, of course, he will forgive DD, that goes without saying. (Harry was just mad at the world for losing Sirius, he will get past that. I have no doubt about that.) 5. I want to find out the *secret* about Petunia. 6. Might be nice if Winky sobered up, goes into recovery or something. ;-) 7. Since it is JKR's favorite, I think I will like it, but I fear that too many of my favorites will die. DD, Molly, Arthur, Hagrid, Lupin, McG, Luna, etc. I am buying the boxes and boxes of Kleenex now. If I had to I could bear the death of everyone except DD. I don't think that I could forgive JKR for killing DD. That would be like the death of God. (Ya, I know "if you meet the Buddha on the road kill him", but I still don't like the idea.) It is almost like they are all allowed to live until July. Hope they are enjoying their remaining days. ;-( Tonks_op From jmrazo at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 04:57:54 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 04:57:54 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127759 > Alla: > > and Fleur :-)> Oh, come on. They're hot! > 31. Trio's friendship. I honestly think that JKR created one of the > most touching friendship in literature , children or otherwise. To > me, > those three really balance each other out , love each other, fight > with each other just as real friends should. When I think about them > that way, I really prefer not to see any romance inside the Trio ( > although I do think that text is going Ron/Hermione). I just want > them to survive the war and enjoy peaceful times. :-) I agree with you. I'm a big trio friendshipper too. And I also think its a bad idea for them to date each other. But R/Hr seems pretty much inevitable to me. Although I'm also a big fan of Ron/Luna. They would be hysterical together. > 32. Remus Lupin. I cannot believe that at one point of > my "potterholic" career I considered Remus to be a boring character. A rare note of disagreement. I think Lupin is boring. A nice guy and a good teacher but I find him more than a little dull. Sirius on the other hand... > 33. Last but definitely not the least, Alla. Weasley' females. You knew I > was going to say that. :-) But they're both so annoying! phoenixgod2000 From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 05:41:52 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 05:41:52 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127760 The Point of Hogwarts First as The Love Mut said, it is important to help a person with the gift of magic to understand that gift and to use it wisely. Someone could also ask what is the point of studying music or art. Magic is an art. And the WW in not like the modern day MW. Even the RW has not always been like the modern RW. For example: Once upon a time, not all *that* long ago. A secondary education was all that most people got. And it prepared them for life in the real world, not for college. Very few went to college. Even today most people over 50 have not been to college. Back in the dark ages of the 1940-mid 60's girls learned to cook and sew. They learned things like math so that they could shop without getting ripped off. All teens learned to read and appreciate the classics and grammar was taught! Boys learned to fix things and make useful things like furniture. (Girls joined Future Homemakers of American and Boys Future Farmers of America.) In the 1940-60's in the U.S. a High School education was the highest that 80% of the population had. Before that many did not even go past the old country school house (8th grade). (The standards were higher than they are today, so a high school diploma was about the same as an Associates is now days.) Whatever the job was that you had as an adult you learned on the job. I know that is not true today, but it use to be. There was more factory work then, but even office work did not require a college education. You could be a banker, bookkeeper, own a business, be a Real Estate Broker, a policeman, member of the Congress, etc. with just a high school education. Only Doctors, Lawyers, nurses, and teachers needed to go to college. The WW is, as we have all observed in many other ways, of a different era. It may be operating in the late 20th century of Muggle time, but I think that when Harry goes to Hogwarts he also goes into another earlier time. I think that I may have hit upon something here. The reason the younger folks on this list may have a problem with some of the things that go on in the social structure of the WW is that they did not live through the same *time* in the RW. While those of us that are the age of DD are more tolerant of the WW because we use to live there. ;-) Back to Hogwarts and Wizard kids. They don't seem to want to work in the Muggle world and don't need the same type of education as a Muggle. We don't see all that much of modern life in the MW either, except for Dudley's computer. Maybe the MW of JKR doesn't have the same educational structure that the U.S. does in 2005. Besides why would a wizard want to live in the MW anyway?? Even in RL in 2005 U.S.A. there are whole groups of people that do not go to college. Some like the Amish don't even go past the 8th grade and don't even have electricity. Many other groups live very simple lives and are happy with that. There is a whole big world out there and many different paths. I love the WW and would stay there forever if I could. Tonks_op From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 06:02:10 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:02:10 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader responce was Re: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127761 Lupinlore wrote: > No one is under any command whatsoever to remain within invisible > boundaries as long as the discussion is based on canon. To wit: > > Canon says that Remus Lupin had a very small role in OOTP. He is > one of my favorite characters whom I find quite interesting. If he > does not appear in HBP more than he did in OOTP I will be > disappointed. I will probably find it a mistake on JKR's part. > > That is absolutely and undeniably my right to say. There is no rule > that I know of against it, and trying to prevent that type of > discussion amounts to censoring opinions you don't happen to like. Carol responds: But your not liking something JKR does is different from JKR making a mistake. If Lupin doesn't play a large role in HBP, you have every right to be disappointed. You also have a right to be disappointed if Snape isn't punished, a position that I find disturbing and that I will never agree with. (At least we agree that the less we see of Grawp, the better.) But neither of us can justifiably say that JKR made a *mistake* because she didn't take our preferences into account. She has said time and time again that she's writing to please herself (and I also believe that she considers her chief and most important audience to be children, and that she won't forget that chosen audience as she writes the last two books). I may well lose my affection for the Potter books if they don't end the way I want them to. I may even sell them or donate them to the library. But I'm not going to say that JKR was *wrong* not to heed my preferences. Who am I to dictate to her? (Yes, I'm an editor, but not *her* editor!) To her, I'm a complete unknown, and my preferences are a matter of complete indifference, as are yours. Please don't think I'm dictating to you or anyone else what can be said on this forum. I'm just reminding you of the difference between opinion and fact, and between your judgment and JKR's. If you expect the books to satisfy your hopes and preferences in every respect, you are bound to be disappointed. JKR can't satisfy every reader, and no single reader is going to be happy with her treatment of all events and characters. Try to look at the books objectively, as works of literature, as the product of the writer's imagination or her craft, rather than dismissing them as uninteresting or "wrong" if they don't meet your preconceptions of how they ought to be written. You are only one of millions of readers, and your tastes are exclusively your own. And the same is true for me and for all of us. I expect that I'll be disappointed in some aspects of HBP and even more aspects of Book 7. JKR can't possibly want what I want for every character. But she will only be "wrong" if she violates her own rules. As long as the plot is credible within the bounds of the secondary world she has created, as long as the characters' actions are in character, she is perfectly "right" to write the books as she pleases. And we are "wrong" to call her decisions "mistakes" if she follows her own rules. Carol From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Tue Apr 19 02:30:42 2005 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (Jazmyn Concolor) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 19:30:42 -0700 Subject: Neville's wand In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <42646D52.80108@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127762 jomarelvy wrote: > Have you realized that all this time (the 5 books) Neville has > been using his father's old wand? In Philosopher's Stone, when > Harry is buying his wand, he's told by the wand expert and shop > owner that if a wizard uses another wizard's wand, the results > are not as satisfactory/effective as if using his own wand. > After all it is the wand that chooses the wizard, right? Ron was using his brother's old wand when he started too. Not every kid can afford a shiny new wand for school, after all. People likely read far too much into that 'wand chooses the wizard' thing. Neville was using Hermione's wand after his broke, Sirius was using other peoples wands just fine and when Harry got his wand, he was so new to the magic thing, he had never had a bit of training yet, so maybe IF you can afford a new wand, then waving a number around till one feels right is best. I have no reason to believe the wands are sentient at all and 'chose' anything and believe that it's 'just an expression' that the wand chooses the wizard, not to be taken literally. Much like with musical instruments, the violin chooses the musician really means you try several till one 'feels' right, it doesn't mean the violin points at someone and says 'him'.. Note that there are second hand wands sold too, meaning that wands can be resold and I suspect that some wizards might have more than one wand for specializing in certain types of magic, such as people who enchant things for a living. The wand is not a sentient thing, it's a tool, just like a hammer or a wrench. As a contractor, I can tell you that we do have our 'favorite' tools, which are ones that work best for certain types of jobs or feel right in the hand when working. I see the wands only as tools, not anything else. - Jazmyn From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 02:30:27 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 02:30:27 -0000 Subject: Why do I love OOTP so much? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127763 Why do I love OOTP so much? I'm the type who is always second guessing myself, testing to make sure I made the right decision. So after reading so many comments about how OOTP was someone's most unfavorite of the HP series, I have to ask myself, "Why, if I had to toss all but one HP book, would that be the one I kept. I'm the only one I know who LOOOOOVED OOTP. Is there something wrong with my judgement? What did I like about it? 1. Dudley Demented: I like the way Harry is so irritated when Dudley and his gang torment the neighborhood kids. I love the way Harry picks a fight with Dudley, but when the dementors come, he doesn't even think twice about coming to the rescue. He even practically carries Dudley home. Harry is just sooooo cool. 2. I love his temper tantrums at Grimmauld Place and in DD's office. 3. I love his anguish over whether he bit Mr. W, and the way he hides away at Grimmauld Place to keep from infecting the others. 4. I love the way he handles his hearing at the MOM. 5. I love the way he befriends Luna. 6. I love the way he handles detention and that evil quill and Umbridge. 7. I love the scene in the Hogshead where they organize the DA. 8. I love the DA and the way he turns out to be a great teacher. 9. I suffer with him at being so left out by DD and the Order when he instinctively knows he is the center of the LV crisis. 10. His scene at the lake at the end of the book breaks my heart. 11. I love everything about it, except the Giants and Gramp. Oh and the cleaning of Grimmauld place gets a little tedious. Why do I love this pathos so much? Am I nuts? Doesn't anyone out there love OOTP the best? Bonnie From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 06:49:52 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:49:52 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? - Plenty of Opportunity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127764 >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" > wrote: > > So, to some extent, I do agree with your basic idea, but I think > you are blowing it out of proportion; making it more than it really > is.Just one man's opinion. > > Steve/bboyminn > Sandra: > ... I still think Hogwartians are at a huge disadvantage. They spend > 7 years getting qualifications that seem to lead practically > nowhere. bboyminn: I still don't see how a Hogwarts education can lead nowhere. Certainly more difficult in the real world, but certainly not nowhere. The wizard world is a microcosm of the real world. Everything the real world needs wizards need. They need soap, furniture, appliances, china, silverware, houses, food, transportation, etc.... For every job in the real world there is a parallel job in the wizard world and the wizard world needs people to invent, improve, manufacture, distribute, export, and sell these products. As well as a substantial number of people in the service industry. These are not menial jobs. A menial job is flipping burgers at McDonalds or working the late shift as a clerk in a convenience store. And by the way, these menial jobs also exist in the wizard world; the magical dishwasher at the Leaky Cauldron is mentioned somewhere. Being a craftsman or artisan can certainly provide a secure and substantial income as can a simple manufacturing job. Once Fred and George's business really takes off, they are going to need to hire people to manufacture their products. That's a lot of jobs for a lot of people. > Sandra continues: > If...the Weasleys ... fancied becoming either an investment banker, > a vet or a chemical engineer (no, really) he would have to go right > back to square one and waste quite a few years catching up ... bboyminn: Well, you seem completely entrenched in this idea that anyone who wants to enter the muggle work world is completely screwed, but I just can't see it. First of all, all these kids have a basic level of literacy. They are proficient at reading, writing, and basic math which means they ARE NOT back to SQUARE ONE. They are back to about square 8. You seem totally resistent to the idea that they could simply bone up a bit, and take the O-Level and/or A-Level tests. But in real life that happens all the time. People who for one reason or another aren't able to finish school (high school), later go back and get an equivalency diploma, and then go on to college. Really, that does happen all the time, and for a wizard who was so determine, they certainly could accomplish that task, and it wouldn't take years. In your examples for one of the Weasleys, certainly Ron (or whoever) could become the magical equivalent of banker (Bill), vet (Charlie), or chemical engineer (potions master). Further, although extremely unlikely that Ron or any Weasley would, if they took an interest in a muggle profession, then certainly, if they were willing to work at it, could become a muggle-world banker, vet, or engineer. > Sandra continues: > ... Say Hermione had to go back to her parents after finishing at > Hogwarts, due to ... whatever - then what? ...edited.. > > Sandra. bboyminn: Then Hermione goes back and works as a receptionist for her parents Dental office. From their with on-the-job-training, she could become a dental assistant or dental techincian, all honorable professions, all yielding a secure and substantial income, and none of which qualify as a menial job. Again, these are literate people. They have a foundation of basic skills. They can read, and futher read relatively complex and obscure texts. They have a grounding in the English language as well as as bit of the classics. They write compositions. They work out complex potions formulas. You seem to have made up your mind, but myself and others have demonstrated a wide range of jobs in the wizard world, and I have further indicated that it is very common for people who have fallen behind in their muggle studies, to bring themselves up to speed and move on from there. This happens everyday in real life, so it could certainly happen to a sufficciently motivated wizard or witch. Again, I do agree with your basic premise, it would be more difficult for Hogwarts educated kids to move into working in the muggle world, but certainly doable. There would be some documentation problems to overcome, but I can see reasonable ways to overcome them. There are plenty of jobs and plenty of opportunities if you're just willing to look for them. Still just one man's opinion. Steve/bboyminn From kjones at telus.net Tue Apr 19 03:54:13 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 20:54:13 -0700 Subject: Why Snape hates Neville Message-ID: <426480E5.9060003@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127765 Kathy writes: I suspect that Snape hates them all because: 1. They did not become marked and entrapped by Voldemort which makes him look like an idiot. 2. They are popular and have friends, which he may well not have had. 3. People like Mrs. Weasley line up to help and look after Harry and it may well be that no one did for Snape. 4. Whichever is the "one", Snape must count on them to win the battle against Voldemort and so free Snape. Would you want to count on either Harry or Neville? Harry has survived so far mainly by pure dumb luck. 5. Snape has had Dumbledor's friendship alone while all of the marauders have come to a poor end including Lupin in many ways. Now that relationship is threatened by Harry, Ron, and Hermione, and increasingly, Neville. 6. Snape sees a brilliant future ahead for all of them while he sees his own as continuing to be bleak. 7. Snape sincerely hated Harry's father and has carried that forward. I disliked one of my uncles intensely and didn't like any of his kids either, some for good reason, some for no good reason at all. 8. How is Snape supposed to keep Harry alive, which he needs to do to save his own life, if Harry keeps getting himself and Neville into these situations. 9. Trying to keep Neville alive in potions is stressing Snape out. What if he is the "one" and kills himself by accident. 10. Dumbledore keeps Snape on a leash and lets Harry and company get away with murder, doesn't even help Snape keep them alive. 11. Dumbledore listens to Harry and company but ignores what Snape tells him. 12. Snape is stuck in a job he hates, teaching children he hates, having danced to Voldemort's wishes, and Dumbledore's wishes, and the only person who had the nerve to hand Voldemort his resignation is dead (Regulus). He has to take it out on somebody! 13. Frankly, if I didn't like the books so well, I'd hate Harry too. Ron would be next. Hermione and I would both benefit from benign neglect, and I'd avoid Neville in the interest of my own good health. I think Snape hates Malfoy as well, just isn't allowed to torment him. Just my opinion of course. KJ From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 07:09:29 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 07:09:29 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127766 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > > If my sister took her kids out of school, she'd have to inform > certain authorities, and demonstrate that they are receiving an > education at either another school, or private tutorship. > ...edited.. > > I was just wondering about it, probably because I'm going > through an insomnia phase, and these things become important > at 3 in the morning! > > Sandra bboyminn: I'm not sure if this solves the problem entirely, but in England all 11 year old kids leave school. That is, they leave their primary (grade) school and go off to another secondary (combined middle and high) school. I'm pretty sure that's why JKR chose this natural transition as the time for kids to enter Hogwarts. Reasonably in this normal transition, some kids go from public* to private schools, while others go from private to public Because of this, it seems reasonable to accept that students 'disappearing' won't be all that big a deal, since in a manner of speaking, they all 'disappear'. (*USA style- public means publicly funded government school; private means founded and funded by private individuals). You do have a valid point though, even with home schooling there is some level of monitoring. I suspect in this case we are just looking too deep into details that aren't relevant to the story. Certainly, if put to the test, JKR could invent an off-page explanation for this. But I find it much more fun to invent explanations of my own. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From bob.oliver at cox.net Tue Apr 19 08:28:34 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:28:34 -0000 Subject: Allowable reader responce was Re: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127767 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > Carol responds: > But your not liking something JKR does is different from JKR making a > mistake. If Lupin doesn't play a large role in HBP, you have every > right to be disappointed. You also have a right to be disappointed if > Snape isn't punished, a position that I find disturbing and that I > will never agree with. (At least we agree that the less we see of > Grawp, the better.) But neither of us can justifiably say that JKR > made a *mistake* because she didn't take our preferences into account. That depends on what you mean by an author making a mistake. You are certainly correct that no author can poll their readership periodically. But, readers can have ideas about what constitutes good writing and what constitutes bad writing. And bad writing, for an author, is a mistake by definition. Now, it also stands to reason that the definition of bad writing is very subjective. What one person sees as a mistake is perfectly fine to another person. Does that mean it is wrong to call it a mistake if that is your honest opinion and perception? Absolutely not! > > I may well lose my affection for the Potter books if they don't end > the way I want them to. I may even sell them or donate them to the > library. But I'm not going to say that JKR was *wrong* not to heed my > preferences. Who am I to dictate to her? (Yes, I'm an editor, but not > *her* editor!) I am the person who plopped down my hard earned money for the book, that's who. As such, I have every right to express my opinion with regard to whether I find the book well-written or poorly written, whether I think certain plot points are mistakes or works of genius. Now, does JKR have to listen? Of course she doesn't. Do I have to buy the book? Of course I don't. Do I have an absolute and undeniable right to speak my opinion on what I find to be mistakes and bad writing, you bet your last dollar I do, and I most certainly will! > > Please don't think I'm dictating to you or anyone else what can be > said on this forum. I'm just reminding you of the difference between > opinion and fact, and between your judgment and JKR's. If you expect > the books to satisfy your hopes and preferences in every respect, you > are bound to be disappointed. JKR can't satisfy every reader, and no > single reader is going to be happy with her treatment of all events > and characters. Try to look at the books objectively, as works of > literature, as the product of the writer's imagination or her craft, > rather than dismissing them as uninteresting or "wrong" if they don't > meet your preconceptions of how they ought to be written. You are only > one of millions of readers, and your tastes are exclusively your own. There is no objective approach to a book. To say otherwise is a rhetorical stance that might be a convention in certain sectors but really has nothing to do with the reality of reading. Every approach is ultimately based on one's personality and emotional make-up. As such, some people will see things as uninteresting, wrong, and yes, mistakes. And those perceptions are perfectly valid. And it is perfectly valid to express them! Does anyone have to read the book? No. Does the author have to please everyone? No. Do people have an absolute right to express themselves as to the mistakes and poor judgments they perceive in the books they read? Absolutely and inarguably! Is that fair to the author? Absolutely! It is part and parcel of the writing business and if an author doesn't like it, they are well advised to find some other line of work. All you can ask is that a person be honest in their opinions. > And the same is true for me and for all of us. > > I expect that I'll be disappointed in some aspects of HBP and even > more aspects of Book 7. JKR can't possibly want what I want for every > character. But she will only be "wrong" if she violates her own rules. > As long as the plot is credible within the bounds of the secondary > world she has created, as long as the characters' actions are in > character, she is perfectly "right" to write the books as she pleases. > And we are "wrong" to call her decisions "mistakes" if she follows her > own rules. > Well, we will have to disagree on that one. There is no "wrong" in reader response as long as the reader is honestly expressing his/her own perception and judgment. And that includes perceptions and judgments of what constitutes poor writing, i.e. mistakes. This will, of course, lead to a flurry of widely varying opinions and criticisms, some of them severe. An author might well get confused and depressed over it, if they are paying attention (which they do not have to do). However, it is part and parcel of the writing culture, at least in America, and writers are well-advised to suck it up and get used to it and learn to deal with it in their own way. Certainly paying no attention to critics is a legitimate method of dealing with this situation. That makes the criticisms no less legitimate, however. Lupinlore From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 09:55:07 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:55:07 -0000 Subject: Disapointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: <20050417222356.GF20194@4dot0.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127768 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, ewe2 wrote: > Where are the theories of yesteryear? Where are the cluehunters for > the basis of the connection of Harry's eyes and wandless magic? Valky: WE're around still *giggle*.. but the thing about discussing/debating hypotheses is that canon is required, and volumetrically canon is a glass of water while the annals of ethics, psychoanalysis, and political correction are a 500 gallon tank, relatively inexhaustible in comparison. So in simpler terms we don't have quite so much gas to blow.. *more giggles* ewe: > I don't doubt next book will be even harder to bear for > some of you, but I just don't care about that. I _want_ my > preconceptions to be challenged. I _want_ the Rowling ship to > successfully navigate the shoals of jagged plot reefs and _surprise_ > me. God knows we need that in fiction. Otherwise it's a load of > boring old farts disecting themes. Valky: Here here!! *stops giggling and raises her glass* Thankyou to potioncat for making her honest opinion known, it's not that I can't or don't want to appreciate the discussion topics that have dominated boards lately, but that it's not the *only* discussion worth having. Really it isn't. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Apr 19 10:02:49 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:02:49 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127769 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > bboyminn: > > I'm not sure if this solves the problem entirely, but in England all > 11 year old kids leave school. That is, they leave their primary > (grade) school and go off to another secondary (combined middle and > high) school. I'm pretty sure that's why JKR chose this natural > transition as the time for kids to enter Hogwarts. Geoff: Excuse my being pedantic, but large numbers of pupils change schools at 13+ and some at 12+. The percentage of transfers at 11+ is far less than it was in the past. When I started teaching in a UK state secondary school in the 1960s, transfer at 11+ (in the state sector)was almost universal. Following the Labour Government's document Circular 10/64 which aimed at making all UK secondary education comprehensive, a large number of Local Education Authorities (LEAs) went for a first/middle/high school structure to replace the infant/junior/secondary layout; for many of them, it kept the costs of converting buildings down. My LEA switched in '69. We then underwent a further change in 1990 when we moved to 12+ as we were transferring Sixth Form pupils to Sixth Form colleges and out of the main schools so that my school then had Years 8-11 only (corresponding to Second up to Fifth Year at Hogwarts). End of education history lesson. :-) From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 10:22:13 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:22:13 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127770 Hannah originally: > > As I said in another post, the only thing that would really > > disappoint me about HBP is if it was badly written with poor > > explanations and plot holes etc. >Caius Marcius replied: > That would also be my number one concern. My number two concern is > that I'll be unable to derive any filk songs out of it. > > But seriously, I would be greatly disappointed if: > 2) Sirius was bought back to life - although many on the group are > rooting for his miraculous return to flesh and blood, I think it > would "gravely" weaken the credibility of JKR's narrative if she were > to do this, implying that no catastrophe is really that bad, and all > can be quickly reversed by authorial fiat (I don't think we're going > to see him as a ghost, though I could live with that). > Hannah now: Actually, of all the plot related things that could really bother me about HBP, that is it. I hadn't thought of it at the time, but yes, if Sirius suddenly pops back up alive, I will be very disappointed in JKR. Why? Because children are hugely influenced by HP, and for those children who have lost a loved one in real life, they're not going to come back. If Sirius does for Harry, it almost seems a betrayal to them. Especially after the very definitive 'no, he won't be a ghost' ending of OotP, and her repeated assurances that magic can't bring back the dead. JKR showed us the suddenness and finality of death with Sirius going beyond the veil - no goodbyes, no big deathbed scene, just 'bang!' he's gone. If he returns in the next book, the poignancy and potentcy of that event is gone. Caius Marcus: > 4) If Hagrid dies Hannah now: I'm fairly sure JKR said in an interview that he'll be around in book 7, so he ought to be safe throughout HBP. Though if that means lots of Grawp, it may not be cause for celebration! :-) Hannah PS. Loved the description of Harry discovering how [INSERTNAME] isn't a pureblood after all! From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 11:06:19 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:06:19 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127771 "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > > In the interest of saying some positive things about HP I have > composed a partial list of things I like about Harry Potter. Enjoy Hannah: Great idea, phoenixgod2000! Here's my list (though it's not complete or exhaustive) 1. The world of Harry Potter feels almost real, and by reading the books, I can escape the mundanity of everyday life. 2. The importance of friendship. 3. I love every one of the characters, even the ones I hate. And I know real life equivalents of many. 4. Magic comes with it's own set of problems and limitations, but it can do some seriously cool stuff! 5. Every time a new book comes out I literally cannot put it down until I've read every word. 6. It gives me something to think about while sitting on/ waiting for trains. 7. It's made thousands of children who wouldn't otherwise have read books, read them. It's made reading 'cool' for more children. And it's enabled other excellent children's authors to be more widely appreciated - by adults and by children. 8. They're funny, sad, and inventive, often in the same paragraph. 9. Snape. 10. The 'Dumbledore resists arrest' scene 11. Fanfiction, my new favourite hobby. 12. All of the people I've got to know, all over the world, through Harry Potter fansites. And about a million other reasons. Hannah From hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 11:32:30 2005 From: hannahmarder at yahoo.co.uk (Hannah) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:32:30 -0000 Subject: Why Snape Hates Neville (Another New Wild Hare theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127772 > > Sabrina wrote: > > > > I was wondering if the reason as for Snape hating Neville, and Harry > > has to do with who is "the one." > > This may also explain why Snape is so much more horrible to Harry. > Not > > only because of his gripe with James Potter, but also because he > knows > > that Harry is not "the one." > > KarentheUnicorn's Reply: > > Ok so maybe it might not be new, this is probably the dumbest > Idea/theory I've had, but I was thinking about why Professor Snape > would hate Neville. Now, I'm not sure of the ages of the Longbottoms? > Alice and Frank, there is no mention of there ages so, is not sure how > well this theory holds up, but, I'll just toss it out and see what > everyone thinks. > > A lot of people have had theories that Snape is in love with Lily, ok, > so, what if he was in love with someone else. What if Alice and Frank > are the same ages as Lily and James, and were in school with that > whole group? What if it was actually Alice he might have been in love > with? > My other Theory on why he hates sweet ol' Neville so much, maybe > because perhaps, Neville may remind Snape of himself in school his > first few years at Hogwarts Hannah: Great crazy (and not so crazy) theories, KarentheUnicorn! I'd not heard the theory of Snape being in love with Alice, but it would work as well as it does for Lily - in fact, probably better. The timing is a bit of a problem, as the Longbottoms were almost certainly older than the Potters. It takes several years (three I think) to become an Auror, and Frank and Alice are spoken of as though they had already qualified and acheieved positions of respect within the profession. This would make them at least two years older than the Potters, probably more. OTOH, that doesn't mean that Snape couldn't have had feelings for Alice. He could have known her as an older girl at school (Snape canonically hang around with students from higher years) or maybe he knew her through a family connection from outside of school. The second theory, about Neville reminding Snape of himself, is a very interesting one, and I rather like it. Snape is exactly the sort of person who might dislike a child on that basis. Look at his 'fools who wear their heart on their sleeve' speech. Slight case of the pot calling the kettle black... There is an excellent fanfiction by After the Rain called 'Distorting Mirrors' (on FA), which explores the idea that a lot of Snape's horrible behaviour stems from his inability to let go of the past and his seeing not just himself, but the friends he once had who've since been killed/ imprisioned, in the students that he currently teaches. In that case, it's the Slytherins that he is seeing in that light, but it's quite possible that the same applies for Neville. We know that Snape doesn't always see people for what they are, rather for what he thinks they are. At least, that's true of Harry, whom he seems to genuinely believe is arrogant, over-confident and pampered, when the opposite is the case. Whether Harry is a special case due to his hatred of James is uncertain. I suspect he's not. Snape seems to form very strong convictions and refuse to let them go even in the face of contradictory evidence. I still lean towards the reluctant belief that Snape is horrible to Neville because he is an easy target. But these are some really interesting alternatives. Hannah From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 12:09:59 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:09:59 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127773 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > bboyminn: > > > > I'm not sure if this solves the problem entirely, but in England > > all 11 year old kids leave school. .... > Geoff: > Excuse my being pedantic, but large numbers of pupils change schools > at 13+ and some at 12+. The percentage of transfers at 11+ is far > less than it was in the past. > > ....edited... > > End of education history lesson. :-) > > Geoff bboyminn: Thanks Geoff, I knew there were people in the group who had more direct experience than I did, and hoped one or more would expand on the idea with more accurate details. My knowledge comes mostly from bits and pieces picked up in our many education discussions. Curious though, what are your thoughts on the level of monitoring and the ease with which Hogwart's students could slip through the cracks. Even when students change schools, the old school would likely get a request from the new school for student transripts and records which would indicate to the old school that the students were still in some school somewhere. Would that be significant enough that the old school would contact the authorities if that request didn't come? We'd be interested in your first-hand insight into that aspect of the question. Thanks. Steve/bboyminn From ejblack at rogers.com Tue Apr 19 12:10:58 2005 From: ejblack at rogers.com (Jeanette) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:10:58 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? - Plenty of Opportunity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127774 > Sandra continues: > > If...the Weasleys ... fancied becoming either an investment banker, > > a vet or a chemical engineer (no, really) he would have to go right > > back to square one and waste quite a few years catching up ... You haven't given any WHY they would ever want to work in the muggle world. All of the positions you cite are work they can do in the WW. One gets the feeling that wizards in general have very little contact or need of contact with the muggles, certainly there seems to be no need for employment by them. Jeanette From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Apr 19 12:27:40 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:27:40 -0000 Subject: Why Snape Hates Neville (Another New Wild Hare theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127775 Hannah: > I still lean towards the reluctant belief that Snape is horrible to > Neville because he is an easy target. But these are some really > interesting alternatives. Potioncat: I think there will turn out to be a plot driven reason for Snape's treatment of Neville. If all JKR was doing was showing how nasty Snape is, she could have him picking on different students. She has let us know that for the most part, Snape is diliked by the students in general, or at least by Gryffindor in general, but we don't see him mistreat anyone except Harry, Hermione and Neville. I think we'll be given some sort of reason for the animosity later in the books. The other possibility is that it's JKR's way of revealing Neville to the readers. She's chosen to have a trio, not a quartet and Potions seems to be one of the few times Neville is part of the group. (Short of the DA.) I also think there was something significant in the Boggart scene with Snape warning Lupin about Neville. Darned if I know what it is though. Potioncat From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net Tue Apr 19 12:53:44 2005 From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Richard Jones) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:53:44 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127776 Over the weekend, I bothered to read three essays on my least favorite subject ? shipping. They had to do with Harry and Hermione ? two were pro-HH (one at mugglenet analyzing GOF and one at HP Lexicon analyzing OOTP) and one was anti-HH (at HP Lexicon analyzing all the books) ? and I have to say that the anti-HH essay had the strongest arguments. Harry certainly loves Hermione like a friend and would give his life to save her, but his reactions to her do not indicate any boyfriend-girlfriend type interest on his part at all. Of course, Hermione's personality might change radically (like the revelation of Ginny in OOTP), but unless that happens there is no reason to think that she is the type of girl that Harry would be looking for for a girlfriend. He needs her as a friend, but he is more annoyed by her bossy, lecturing, and nagging nature than attracted to her. Her voice and her way of talking annoy him. He avoids her at times, lies to her, and ignores her (usually good) advice. She doesn't laugh at his jokes (which is more important than it sounds). They do not have fun together when Harry needs someone to give him a few laughs. She is not a sympathetic listener. He hides his feelings from her and confides in others. All in all, Harry needs someone else for a girlfriend. He needs Hermione to be just who she is ? she is important to him as she is even though it means she is not girlfriend material. The essay "D'You Really Think They're Suited?" at HP Lexicon documents all these points and is well worth reading, if you can make it through 30 pages. Also a second point. In her March 2004 interview, JKR was asked if Harry would fall for another girl or would be too busy for romance? She answered that "he'll be busy but what is life without a little romance?" But I think romance will once again not be a prominent part of HBP, and shippers who analyze each syllable for clues are going to be disappointed. JKR will pay a lot more attention to the plot about Voldemort and make romance a side issue at best. (In the end, Cho was just a side plot in OOTP.) This is an adventure series, not teenage romance novels. So there probably will be a little "gratuitous romance," as it were, but nothing serious. All shippers are probably not going to be happy. (There is a recent essay at mugglenet on this too.) Richard Jones From northsouth17 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 12:57:23 2005 From: northsouth17 at yahoo.com (northsouth17) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:57:23 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? The Dursleys were right. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127777 > Sandra replies: .......and that misses my point. Middle and High > schools educate students to give them a platform for any > number of university courses and in turn, jobs. The kids leave > Hogwarts with a very limited range of options ahead of them (as > you put it yourself with your own job suggestions), and in my > view, a thoroughly medieval path to tread. I agree, for the most part, that growing up in Hogwarts is going to seriously restrict you in the muggle world. But I don't see why JKR is being blamed for this. I mean, the WW does not exactly hold to a relativist view of culture, do they? The WW is presented as far, far, far from perfect, even on the "mundane" (unVoldemort Related) level - corruption at the ministry, institutionalized bigotry and racism, etc. The "nationalism" of the WW is hardly a flaw, IMO. Like any culture, it propagates itself. Hogwarts indoctrinates muggleborns (Hermione is a great example, I think. She's obviously a good student by Muggleworld standards too, but she no longer even has the option, and probably not the desire, to go study at a muggle university, barring some super human effort from her. It's less obvious with Harry, becuse he hates the Dursleys and the whole muggle world, so the fact he's never really going back is softened - and for the readers too, I think.) and totally re-socilizes them. Is it a flaw in the WW, maybe, I think so. It certainly puts muggleborns like Hermoine in a very difficult position, and I do think that the WW dosen't offer nearly everything the regular world does. But I do not think it's a flaw in the *books*. Northsouth From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 13:08:03 2005 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:08:03 -0000 Subject: The Wizard Formerly Known as the Half-Blood Prince Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127778 I don't know if this has been addressed here, so please excuse me if it has. *** This is where I let you in on my theory on who is the Half-Blood Prince. The 7 potions represent the seven DADA professors of the entire series. Of bottles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, three are hiding/disguised poisons that will kill the drinker. Bottles 1, 4, and 5 are poisons. Quirrell, Crouch!Moody, and Umbridge all in some way tried to kill Harry. Poisons are always found on nettle wines left side. The wines will do nothing to you, except maybe just keep you from moving on (or going back), wasting your time. Bottles 2 and 6 are the nettle wines (with bottles 1 and 5 to their lefts). So, DADA #6 will likely waste our time (so maybe DA sessions actually will continue). Or if not, he/she won't be a threat to Harry. This leaves the bottles to move forward and back. Bottle 3 is what Harry drinks to move forward. This is Lupin. Harry learned quite a bit from Lupin, especially the Patronus charm, which allowed him to save his own life (along with Sirius and Hermione) to 'move on'. Now here is the second part to my theory. Snape will be DADA #7. This is the only bottle we know the result of, and where it was in the line. It sends the drinker back. Yes, Hermione drank this, but she is not the main character. Nor was the task meant for two. It was meant for one. This is Harry's story. Snape's Worst Memory sent Harry back in time. Still with me? LOL The dwarf and giant bottles do not hold death in their insides. (The wines or the forward or back). Either meaning Dobby and Hagrid are safe from death, or Ginny seemed she was going to, but didn't. (I'm forgetting something else here.) Bottles 2 and 6 are twins, though different at first sight. JKR has mentioned some link between COS and HBP (books 2 and 6). This would just scream that Tom Riddle is the HBP. But, she said it was not him. Also, there is no trace left of the HBP's story in COS, which lead me to someone who could have been mentioned in COS because a certain time period was visited... GRINDELWALD. We know nothing except that he was defeated by DD in 1945. Thanks to the translation of the French title, we know we're dealing with a person who is a half-blood. Grindelwald could very well have a similar story to that of Tom Riddle. HP and TR certainly have similar stories. Also, there is one other book in the series so far that referred to a person. The person was named only once in the first book. That was Sirius Black, The Prisoner of Azkaban. Grindelwald was mentioned only once in the first book. He gets my vote for being the Half-Blood Prince. It ties in with the good/bad title theory too. That's all for now. Marci From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 13:09:27 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:09:27 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127779 Sandra wrote: I'm > not sure about me taking it to an extreme though, because I still > think Hogwartians are at a huge disadvantage. They spend 7 > years getting qualifications that seem to lead practically > nowhere. (snip the rest) Ginger: Hi Sandra! I've read your posts and the replies, but I have a thought to add. I would say that Hogwartians (love that word) are getting the better end of the deal. Purebloods, or those raised in the WW, have probably little intent of joining the Muggle world. Halfbloods (perhaps raised in the WW, but with ties to the MW) and Muggleborns may want a Muggle career, but then again, they may not. Hogwarts doesn't limit them. It expands their horizons. If they didn't learn all the wizarding stuff, they'd only have half the options life offers them. As it is, they can go either way. Had they just been sent to Muggle schools, they would only have the Muggle options. Believe me, as one who works the graveyard shift at a convenience store (wave to Steve), I would be able to do that job with the same education I had when I was a junior high student. The spells I would have learned at Hogwarts would be very handy as I am often there alone. Even a good *scourgify!* would be priceless. Now lest anyone think I am *too* menial, I also work in a factory making sewer pipe fittings (no, not as glamerous as it sounds). Most of the people I work with don't have a high school education. There's no need for literacy in most positions, unless you want management. What's my point? A high school education can be worthless or it can be valuable, depending on your intent for post- high school life. The same goes for Hogwarts. It suits the needs of magical kids for their post- education needs better than going to a Muggle school and not learning it at all. It's all on where you are going in life. Most kids haven't figured out what that is yet, but at least at Hogwarts they are being taught what they need to meet their full potential. Should they want to go to the Muggle world, I don't think we have canon for the WW stopping them. I think we should remember that Hogwarts is a school set up to educate the WW, not provide a Muggle education. It is a specialized school, and teaches accordingly. They teach what is needed for all their students, not the potential options of a few. I don't know if they have summer classes in Britain (I think I remember someone here saying that is rare), but there is always home study during the summer if one really wants to learn Muggle subjects. Or one can say "Bugger it, I'm going to be a stock car mechanic." and go back to the MW. I guess what I'm trying to say is that Hogwarts education would be pretty useless to us Muggles, but it is what they need in the WW. Insert obligatory paragraph explaining that this is my opinion. My rights, your rights, etc. Ginger, who is pushing 40 and has to find a new career due to back problems. Where's Hogwarts when you need it? From willsonkmom at msn.com Tue Apr 19 13:37:23 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:37:23 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127780 Sandra wrote: > So I stand by my point - going to Hogwarts is a big step > backwards for the kids, because JKR never thought out the > credibility of the place. it should have been a summer camp, and > nothing more. Potioncat: Well, going to Hogwarts isn't supposed to prepare you for Muggle life. It does, apparantly, do a fine job of preparing students for the Wizarding World. Look at how well Percy has done! And Oliver has a spot on a professional sports team. I don't think it very likely that a young witch or wizard would choose Muggle life. It's hard to keep them on the farm once they've seen the city. But I would think they would drop out of Hogwarts before the 7th year and resume their Muggle studies if they were disenchanted with magic. As far as careers go, who would think something as boring as banking could be so exciting? In the WW you earn hazard pay! (Apologies to bankers on the list.)We haven't seen a lot of the adult world of Magic. And what we've seen has been through Harry's eyes. He hasn't had the chance to really see life outside of Hogwarts. To me the WW must be pretty neat if witches and wizards of DD's age are still mentally alert, physically active and involved in meaningful pursuits. Potioncat...humming the tune to Mr. Ed for some unknown reason. From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 13:58:43 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:58:43 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "deborahhbbrd" wrote: > Oh, you rash person, you! > > I can't see which Dorothy L Sayers books are on the JKR website shelf. I can't see so many of them, either! These are the books (leaving out the links) I CAN see, from top to bottom and left to right: * World Mythology, no author * My Favourite, [author illegible to me] * [Title illegible to me], Roddy Doyle * [Title illegible to me], [author illegible to me] * "?" * I Capture The Castle, [author illegible to me] * [Title illegible to me], Dorothy L. Sayers [Title illegible to me], Dorothy L. Sayers (these seem like vol. 1&2 of something!) * Pride and Prejudice, Jane Austen [although that's illegible to me] * Children's Stories, no author * E. Nesbitt's Fairy Tales, E. Nesbitt ++ Bookmark labeled "Mr. Book Mark" ++ * [Title illegible to me], no author * Tales (?) [Title is pretty illegible to me], E. Nesbitt (?) [author's name is pretty illegible to me, also] * Manx Mouse, [author illegible to me] * Wizards Book, [author illegible to me] * [Title illegible to me], [author illegible to me] * Short Stories, [author illegible to me] * [Title illegible to me], [author illegible to me] * Wizards Book, [author illegible to me] * Grimble, Clement Freud * Book of Spells (?) [Title is pretty illegible to me], no author * Behind a flask with a red liquid are two books, both with Titles illegible to me, by authors illegible to me * Spell Potions (?) [Title is pretty illegible to me], [author illegible to me] * Katherine Mansfield, [author illegible to me] * Book of Spells (?) [Title is pretty illegible to me], [author illegible to me] * [Title illegible to me], no author * Spell Potions (?) [Title is pretty illegible to me], [author illegible to me] * Magical Studies, no author * Fairy Tails (!), no author * Emma, Jane Austen [although that's illegible to me] * The Van, Roddy Doyle * Writers & Artists Yearbook * Sense and Sensibility, Jane Austen [although that's illegible to me] Can anyone else with better vision and/or better monitor shed light on anything else? Me, I've picked up on the hints, threads, clues and assorted tidbits that are found in Mythology (more on this later)...I'll leave the Austen, Sayers and fantasy clues to those better suited to tackle them. -Joe in SoFla From naama_gat at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 13:58:59 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:58:59 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Sherry. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127782 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > Sherry wrote: > > We know from OOTP, that to become an auror, Harry would > have to undergo three more years of intensive and specialized > training. I assume it's the same for other careers in the > wizarding world. I associate Hogwarts with middle school > through high school, and then the students go on to other > training for careers. Or they do things like drive the knight > bus, which probably doesn't need post Hogwarts training. < > > > Thanks Sherry! > But that kind of emphasises my point in that the kids are very > limited in what they can do in life. Wizards and witches don't > seem to live in places with muggles, and the exams etc are > useless in a muggle world anyway, so any careers and > livelihoods have to be in the wizarding world - but to do what? > They learn what all the other magical ones learn, and it all > seems so pointless. I'm amazed that JKR hasn't tried to give a > little credibility or purpose to the reason Hogwarts exists. It > just dawned on me that the call-up from Hogwarts to the 11 year > olds is hardly a real priviledge, is it? It's like narrowing their > life path somewhat. I think. > I think that Sherry is right, in that Hogwarts parallels high school in Muggledom. You are also right in that it doesn't seem to open much career options to its graduates - but then, neither does high school. A lot of the humorous side of the books arises from the paralells between the regular world and the WW, hiding just around the corner. While JKR hasn't made the WW completely consistent (there's a thread about the ability of a writer to do that), its clear that she means it to be self-sufficient: it includes all the institutions that "our" world has. Banks (well, one), highly bureaucratic governemnt, justice system, police (of a kind - aurors and other ministry law enforcers), schools (well, one). The WW also comprises other features that paralell regular modern life - rock singers, radio, magazines, tabloids, photographs, spectator sports, buses (well, one) ... So, kids who finish Hogwarts parallel kids who graduate from high school - they find jobs within their world. That is, Hogwarts kids find jobs within the WW - as ministry workers, shop keepers, Quidditch players, work for banks, breed dragons... the fact that the list doesn't seem long enough is because it is a fictitious world, and JKR wasn't interested (I suppose) in developing a full and viable WW economy. However, she means for magic kids to stay within the magic world - which is kind of the point. It's a better world than the Muggle world (we wouldn't be so eager to read about it if it weren't). Naama From tonyaminton at gmail.com Tue Apr 19 14:57:36 2005 From: tonyaminton at gmail.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 09:57:36 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why do I love OOTP so much? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127783 On 4/18/05, bbkkyy55 wrote: > > > Why do I love OOTP so much? > > I'm the type who is always second guessing myself, testing to > make sure I made the right decision. So after reading so many > comments about how OOTP was someone's most unfavorite of the HP > series, I have to ask myself, "Why, if I had to toss all but one HP > book, would that be the one I kept. I'm the only one I know who > LOOOOOVED OOTP. Is there something wrong with my judgement? What > did I like about it? > > 1. Dudley Demented: I like the way Harry is so irritated when Dudley > and his gang torment the neighborhood kids. I love the way Harry > picks a fight with Dudley, but when the dementors come, he > doesn't even think twice about coming to the rescue. He even > practically carries Dudley home. Harry is just sooooo cool. > > 2. I love his temper tantrums at Grimmauld Place and in DD's > office. > > 3. I love his anguish over whether he bit Mr. W, and the way he > hides away at Grimmauld Place to keep from infecting the others. > > 4. I love the way he handles his hearing at the MOM. > > 5. I love the way he befriends Luna. > > 6. I love the way he handles detention and that evil quill and > Umbridge. > > 7. I love the scene in the Hogshead where they organize the DA. > > 8. I love the DA and the way he turns out to be a great teacher. > > 9. I suffer with him at being so left out by DD and the Order when > he instinctively knows he is the center of the LV crisis. > > 10. His scene at the lake at the end of the book breaks my heart. > > 11. I love everything about it, except the Giants and Gramp. Oh and > the cleaning of Grimmauld place gets a little tedious. > > Why do I love this pathos so much? Am I nuts? Doesn't anyone > out there love OOTP the best? > > Bonnie > > Now Tonya, I feel his pain when he losses his Godfather. I love how his defiance of Umbridge grows and during OWLS when he sends his patronus at her. LOVE THAT!! Tonya From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 12:04:27 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:04:27 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127784 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hannah" wrote: > Hannah: Great idea, phoenixgod2000! Here's my list (though it's not complete or exhaustive) 1. The world of Harry Potter feels almost real, and by reading the books, I can escape the mundanity of everyday life. 2. The importance of friendship. 3. I love every one of the characters, even the ones I hate. And I know real life equivalents of many. (edited) And about a million other reasons. > > Hannah Hi Hannah, those are all good reasons and are just what I look for in a book! While you're waiting for the next instalment of HP, I'd suggest you try any of these, which I feel fit a lot of your points: A College Of Magics, The Odessa Stone (favourite book!), Sabriel, Artemis Fowl and The Subtle Knife? They're all worth a look, and in different ways are enjoyable. Terry Pratchett's pretty good, at times. As for HP, I hope the next book brings a little warmth into Harry's world because that's what I felt was missing from OoTP. Too much shouting, too much anger, not enough civility and kindness. Sandra (not on the edge of her seat, yet) From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 10:21:09 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:21:09 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? Geoff. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127785 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > Excuse my being pedantic, but large numbers of pupils change schools at 13+ and some at 12+. The percentage of transfers at 11+ is far less than it was in the past. > > End of education history lesson. :-) Your answers are always interesting and nicely structured, Geoff! However, I wasn't questioning 'why' Harry got his invite at 11, I was wondering how he managed to disappear off any academic registers and therefore no longer have any academic records of being anywhere. Are the LEA's (or whatever authority) that poor at keeping tabs on who is at a school and who isn't? The same goes for Hermione and any other student brought in from the muggle world. Suddenly they go from one muggle school to... one which isn't exactly listed anywhere. I would be surprised (and very shocked) if it was so easy for any child to drop out of the system. It was just something that occurred to me late on night when all of this suddenly seemed important. To me, it's a "Book One" point that should have been thrown in right at the start, and dealt with in one sentence, or tiny part of a conversation. I like books to have a credible background - Lord Of The Rings (et al) has to be the definitive one, in my view. Tolkien was devoted to what he was doing, and gave us something that still reflects his love of writing and creativity. Sandra From kayt.williams at btinternet.com Tue Apr 19 12:40:50 2005 From: kayt.williams at btinternet.com (Fitzov de Sullens) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:40:50 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050419124050.15436.qmail@web86710.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127786 >Caius Marcius: > I would be greatly disappointed if: > 2) Sirius was bought back to life Fitzov: Am I the only person on this site who would be tremendously disappointed if Sirius DOESN'T reappear in Book 6, very much alive? I fail to understand why this would be some great cop out on the part of JKR, who has given us plenty of clues that Sirius didn't 'die' a normal death. After all, if both Harry and Voldemort hadn't cheated death, there would be no story! Fitzov [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Apr 19 15:45:00 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:45:00 -0000 Subject: Why do I love OOTP so much? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127787 Bonnie asked: > > Why do I love OOTP so much? Tonya added: > I feel his pain when he losses his Godfather. > > I love how his defiance of Umbridge grows and during OWLS when he > sends his patronus at her. LOVE THAT!! SSSusan: There were certainly things I didn't like about OotP (Grawp, the battle in the DoM [which I thought was pretty laim], Molly's losing it with Sirius, Hermione's foolhardiness with SPEW, Sirius' death, to name a few), but I find lots of reasons to love OotP as well. Among them: 1) Snape & Harry in Occlumency -- GOOD stuff there 2) The return of Lupin 3) Sirius' insistence upon giving Harry some *answers* for once! 4) Ginny's "reminder" to Harry that he's NOT the only one to know what's it like to have been taken over by Voldemort 5) The presence of Amelia Bones in the Wizengamot 6) McGonagall's & Snape's interactions with Umbridge 7) The twins' departure from Hogwarts 8) Harry's realization, after McGonagall was hit with the stunners, that "he had always expected Professor McGonagall to be there, irascible and inflexible, perhaps, but always dependably, solidly present..." 9) Peeves punting students across the swamp [imagining *both* possibilities for "punting"] 10) McGonagall's walking stick being unavailable to her because Peeves was using it :-) 11) Things coming to a head between Harry & DD and everything *not* going perfectly in that moment 12) "It unscrews the other way" Siriusly Snapey Susan From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 16:02:04 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:02:04 -0000 Subject: Harry (technically) dying? WHOA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127788 Digging further, I found the following map of the greco-roman underworld: http://homepage.mac.com/cparada/GML/000Images/004maps/underworldmap.g if In it you will see Charon, the old geezer, ferrying souls across a SWAMP (i.e. marsh) like Filch did in Book 5, as well as the journeys of Odysseus and Heracles. Odysseus braved the terrors of the underworld, and while he was there, Hades allowed Thiresias, Anticlias--Odysseus' mother(!), Ajax and others to give him advice on his next journey. They gave him important advice about the Cattle of the Sun (herded by Apollo), Scylla & Charybdis and the Sirens. From there on the travels were harder for Odysseus, but they would have been much worse of it wasn't for the help of the dead. Heracles descended to the Underworld because his tormentor Eurystheus imposed on him the task of capturing and bringing up to our world of light Hades' three-headed dog Cerberus. Heracles not only found dead souls in the underworld; he also met Theseus and his accomplice Pirithous (who had come to Hades, also through the entrance at Taenarum, with the damn fool idea of marrying Persephone). On account of this great insolence, they were both bound to chairs (like in the trial room!) in the Underworld before they were dead. Some said Heracles rescued both, others that he could only raise Theseus, because when he wished to save Pirithous the earth quaked, and he desisted. Still others say neither ever returned. (I'm going with the "saved Theseus only" version) It's not all that certain whether Heracles returned to this world through the exit at Troezen, through the one at Hermione (!), the exit facing the island of Hydra in eastern Argolis, or through the exit at Mount Laphystius in Boeotia. In any case, Heracles came with Fluf...er...Cerberus to Mycenae, and after showing it to Eurystheus, he carried it back to the Underworld. More later, -Joe in SoFla From elsyee_h at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 16:27:07 2005 From: elsyee_h at yahoo.com (Tammy) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:27:07 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? Geoff. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127789 > > Geoff: > > Excuse my being pedantic, but large numbers of pupils > change schools at 13+ and some at 12+. The percentage of > transfers at 11+ is far less than it was in the past. > > > > End of education history lesson. :-) > >Sandra: > Your answers are always interesting and nicely structured, Geoff! > However, I wasn't questioning 'why' Harry got his invite at 11, I > was wondering how he managed to disappear off any academic > registers and therefore no longer have any academic records of > being anywhere. Are the LEA's (or whatever authority) that poor at > keeping tabs on who is at a school and who isn't? The same > goes for Hermione and any other student brought in from the > muggle world. Suddenly they go from one muggle school to... > one which isn't exactly listed anywhere. I would be surprised > (and very shocked) if it was so easy for any child to drop out of > the system. Tammy: First of all, I'm not the slightest bit familiar with British schooling systems. That having been said, I do recall having read the most plausible explanation, IMO, that the students "drop off" the schooling authorities radar. Wherever I read it (I think it was here a few months ago), it was said that there are actually a decent number of students who are homeschooled and some of them simply disappear from the system. Presumably that would be because the British government is as efficient as most governments tend to be. I think homeschooling or an out-of-country private(US)/public(UK) school is the simplest answer. After all, Harry is supposedly going to St. Brutus' and they don't sound like a place most people would question. From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Tue Apr 19 16:32:35 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 17:32:35 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why do I love OOTP so much? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050419163235.81718.qmail@web86202.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127790 --- cubfanbudwoman wrote: > SSSusan: > There were certainly things I didn't like about OotP > (Grawp, the > battle in the DoM [which I thought was pretty laim], > Molly's losing > it with Sirius, Hermione's foolhardiness with SPEW, > Sirius' death, to > name a few), but I find lots of reasons to love OotP > as well. Among > them: The biggest thing I didn't like was the lack of the punchline. The previous 4 books certainly had more bang-y ending. I found lots of things to like about OOTP as well: 1. McGonagall rocks. Her exchanges with Umbridge were priceless. 2. We saw a bit of Ravenclaw. 3. The whole occlumency/legilimency idea is fantastic, I hope we hear about it some more in the future books. 4. Fred and George succeeding with their business. 5. Umbridge as an excellent parody on governments meddling in education. 6. Neville and Ginny growing up. 7. My suspicion about school years of James and Sirius being proven right. Oh yes, I thought they were a pair of rich, handsome, pureblood, sporty, popular bullies before OOTP came out, and if yahoo had a decent search ability I'd have the message number to prove it. Irene Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 16:32:33 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:32:33 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: <20050419124050.15436.qmail@web86710.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127791 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fitzov de Sullens wrote: > Fitzov: > > Am I the only person on this site who would be tremendously disappointed if Sirius DOESN'T reappear in Book 6, very much alive? I fail to understand why this would be some great cop out on the part of JKR, who has given us plenty of clues that Sirius didn't 'die' a normal death. GEO: Except Rowling has constantly said that there are limitations to magic in the Harry Potter Universe and one of those limitations that she specifically imposed was that people couldn't be resurrected from the dead by the use of magic. Plus considering how she was saying that there was a major death in OOTP, I would consider it cheating on her part if she reversed the death or rewrote it so that Sirius didn't actually die. > After all, if both Harry and Voldemort hadn't cheated death, there > would be no story! GEO: Harry and Voldemort didn't exactly cheat death. The two of them had powerful magical protections that made it impossible for Voldemort to actually die and for Harry to be immune from Voldemort's killing curse. It's a different story all together if you have someone that actually died coming back from the dead. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Apr 19 17:17:05 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 17:17:05 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127792 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > > In the interest of saying some positive things about HP I have > composed a partial list of things I like about Harry Potter. Enjoy > Geoff: To add to the lists from other people... McGonagall's sparring matches with Umbridge.... From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 18:14:50 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:14:50 -0000 Subject: The Wizard Formerly Known as the Half-Blood Prince In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127793 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" wrote: > > I don't know if this has been addressed here, so please excuse me if > it has. > > *** > > This is where I let you in on my theory on who is the Half-Blood > Prince. > > The 7 potions represent the seven DADA professors of the entire > series. > > Of bottles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7, three are hiding/disguised > poisons that will kill the drinker. Bottles 1, 4, and 5 are > poisons. Quirrell, Crouch!Moody, and Umbridge all in some way tried > to kill Harry. > > Poisons are always found on nettle wines left side. The wines will > do nothing to you, except maybe just keep you from moving on (or > going back), wasting your time. Bottles 2 and 6 are the nettle wines > (with bottles 1 and 5 to their lefts). So, DADA #6 will likely waste > our time (so maybe DA sessions actually will continue). Or if not, > he/she won't be a threat to Harry. > > This leaves the bottles to move forward and back. Bottle 3 is what > Harry drinks to move forward. This is Lupin. Harry learned quite a > bit from Lupin, especially the Patronus charm, which allowed him to > save his own life (along with Sirius and Hermione) to 'move on'. > > Now here is the second part to my theory. Snape will be DADA #7. This > is the only bottle we know the result of, and where it was in the > line. It sends the drinker > back. Yes, Hermione drank this, but she is not the main character. > Nor was the task meant for two. It was meant for one. This is > Harry's story. Snape's Worst Memory sent Harry back in time. > > Still with me? LOL > > The dwarf and giant bottles do not hold death in their insides. (The > wines or the forward or back). Either meaning Dobby and Hagrid are > safe from death, or Ginny seemed she was going to, but didn't. (I'm > forgetting something else here.) > > Bottles 2 and 6 are twins, though different at first sight. JKR has > mentioned some link between COS and HBP (books 2 and 6). This would > just scream that Tom Riddle is the HBP. But, she said it was not > him. Also, there is no trace left of the HBP's story in COS, which > lead me to someone who could have been mentioned in COS because a > certain time period was visited... > > GRINDELWALD. We know nothing except that he was defeated by DD in > 1945. Thanks to the translation of the French title, we know > we're dealing with a person who is a half-blood. Grindelwald could > very well have a similar story to that of Tom Riddle. HP and TR > certainly have similar stories. > > Also, there is one other book in the series so far that referred to a > person. The person was named only once in the first book. That was > Sirius Black, The Prisoner of Azkaban. > > Grindelwald was mentioned only once in the first book. He gets my > vote for being the Half-Blood Prince. It ties in with the good/bad > title theory too. > > That's all for now. > > Marci Fascinating hypothesis regarding the seven potions and the DADA professors. (Reminds me of the Knight2King 7 moves = 7 years essay.) I would concur that so far the 5 DADAs that have been at Hogwarts coincide in character with the first 5 potions. You lost me when you named Grindelwald as your candidate for HBP. I'm not sure if this is because I wasn't making all the leaps you were or if your leaps, themselves, were too far. I, too, agree that we will learn a lot more about Grindelwald and have posted on this last year some time. (Another reason I think we will learn more about him is Dumbledore's chocolate frog card. We learned about Flamel in PS/SS; I think we will learn about Grindelwald in 6 or 7). However, I just did not make these connections: 1. Moving from the 7 potions/7 DADAs to the identity of the HBP 2. Grindelwald being HBP (and I am ignorant of the translation of the French title and need to be informed). Help! Julie From meltowne at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 18:42:14 2005 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:42:14 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? Should be a summer camp. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127794 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > So I stand by my point - going to Hogwarts is a big step > backwards for the kids, because JKR never thought out the > credibility of the place. it should have been a summer camp, and > nothing more. > Sandra. But is it really any different than many of the choices muggles make? My cousin studied English Literature in college - has a Master's in it even. But what can she do with that? She decided she doesn't want to teach. If she wants to be an investment banker, a vet, or a chemist, she has to start back at square one too. I don't know much about schooling in the UK, but in the US, children can be home schooled, or attend a private school if they want. If the private school is not accredited, or they are homeschooled, they can take proficiency exams to get into college - and many do. If I look back at what courses were required to graduate from high school, I would bet most of the hogwarts graduates could pass the required proficiency exams. Lets see what is offered at Hogwarts: Ancient Runes - foreign language, perhaps? Some of my friends took Latin, which is about as useful in everyday life. Arithmancy - while not exactly mathematics, I bet it requires complicated calculations Astronomy - while their use of it is different, the basics are probably the same as offered in some college level courses. Care of Magical Creatures - related to Biology. Charms - not closely related to a muggle class, but maybe analogous to language arts? Herbology - Botany? History of Magic - not the same material, but not that far different than muggle history, I bet. Muggle Studies - foreign culture studies? Potions - chemistry Sure, they might be required to study some before taking an exam, but most Hogwarts graduates have better study skills than the muggle teens I know. From redlena_web at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 18:42:44 2005 From: redlena_web at yahoo.com (redlena_web) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:42:44 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127795 > Sandra87b wrote: > If my sister took her kids out of school, she'd have to inform > certain authorities, and demonstrate that they are receiving an > education at either another school, or private tutorship. They > would have to have exams and reach formal levels to show > that everything is going well. > So when, for example, the Potters and the Grangers send their > Harry and Hermione off to Hogwarts, what do they tell the local > authorities? RedLena: Since the Muggle-born/raised students like Harry and Hermione are transferring to Hogwarts, a *magic* school, I would presume that the explanation of their disappearance from the Muggle school system would be magical. Memory charms, magically altered documents and the like, possibly by some office of the Ministry of Magic, could be used to adjust the records of a particular student who otherwise would seem to have "disappeared." Perhaps the records would even be expunged... removing any reference to the particular child, so there'd be no reason for any Muggle authority to seek out the records of said child. For anyone who might think this is unlikely because of the effort involved in locating the appropriate documents and people to "adjust," remember that potentially Hogwarts-bound children are identified upon birth. Those responsible for the magical altering of the small portion of students for whom this would be necessary would have 11 years in which to track where the efforts would be needed. Anyway, that's my idea, any comments? -- RedLena From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 18:50:37 2005 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:50:37 -0000 Subject: The Wizard Formerly Known as the Half-Blood Prince In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127796 "Marci" > wrote: > > > > > > > > Bottles 2 and 6 are twins, though different at first sight. JKR has > > mentioned some link between COS and HBP (books 2 and 6). This would > > just scream that Tom Riddle is the HBP. But, she said it was not > > him. Also, there is no trace left of the HBP's story in COS, which > > lead me to someone who could have been mentioned in COS because a > > certain time period was visited... > > > > GRINDELWALD. We know nothing except that he was defeated by DD in > > 1945. Thanks to the translation of the French title, we know > > we're dealing with a person who is a half-blood. Grindelwald could > > very well have a similar story to that of Tom Riddle. HP and TR > > certainly have similar stories. > > > > Also, there is one other book in the series so far that referred > to a > > person. The person was named only once in the first book. That was > > Sirius Black, The Prisoner of Azkaban. > > > > Grindelwald was mentioned only once in the first book. He gets my > > vote for being the Half-Blood Prince. It ties in with the good/bad > > title theory too. > > > > That's all for now. > > > > Marci > > Fascinating hypothesis regarding the seven potions and the DADA > professors. (Reminds me of the Knight2King 7 moves = 7 years > essay.) I would concur that so far the 5 DADAs that have been at > Hogwarts coincide in character with the first 5 potions. > > You lost me when you named Grindelwald as your candidate for HBP. > I'm not sure if this is because I wasn't making all the leaps you > were or if your leaps, themselves, were too far. I, too, agree that > we will learn a lot more about Grindelwald and have posted on this > last year some time. (Another reason I think we will learn more > about him is Dumbledore's chocolate frog card. We learned about > Flamel in PS/SS; I think we will learn about Grindelwald in 6 or > 7). However, I just did not make these connections: > 1. Moving from the 7 potions/7 DADAs to the identity of the HBP > 2. Grindelwald being HBP (and I am ignorant of the translation of > the French title and need to be informed). > > Help! > > Julie Marci again: LOL This is just the basics. I'm infamous for not writing stuff down. This is what I could remember in the span of 5 minutes while I was at work. Linking the bottles and the professors took about 10. The jump to Grindelwald is more to do with the link between books 2 and 6, not the bottles being assigned to DADA professors. But by linking them to the professors, they were linked to the books as well. But it's probably not him either. LOL I just hope it's not Godric Gryffindor. Where's the fun in that? OH, I KNEW I'D LEFT OUT SOMETHING!!!!!!!! The Voldemort link to the poisons/books/bottles 1, 4 and 5. But I can't go into it because that is more a theory to the series outcome. Marci (Does HP give anyone else headaches??) From tamliv at cox.net Tue Apr 19 20:12:14 2005 From: tamliv at cox.net (Tamee Livingston) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:12:14 -0500 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help References: <1113860338.26341.35161.m28@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003501c5451c$16655e30$6401a8c0@Lupin> No: HPFGUIDX 127797 Tamee: For brevity, I'm snipping as much of Deborah's post as I dare before going bringing up some comparisons in themes between Sayers and JKR. Deborah wrote: > >[Snip]. Seems to have been a tweedy, hand-knit cardigan kind of lady who never married but did have an illegitimate child at one point! << Tamee: Actually, while Sayers did indeed have an illegitimate son, who until after her death never knew she was his mother, she did indeed get married to a man named Mac Fleming, a WWI veteran who suffered from PTSS. Deborah wrote: >> [snip] The younger son of a Duke and a half-French woman (does that make him a half-blood?), he served in the First World War with great gallantry out of a sense of duty; he still sometimes gets flashbacks. Never had to work; lived on the income from his inherited properties. And detected, as a hobby and from a sense of duty. [snip] For most of the canon, is hopelessly in love with one Harriet Vane, an author of detective stories who is falsely accused of murder until Lord P gets her off; she won't consider a relationship based on condescension and gratitude, so keeps on refusing him until finally, and at great length, she falls. And they live happily ever after. Lord P has the obligatory batman who saves his life in the trenches and goes on to be his Jeevesified manservant. Can't recall the poor bloke's name, but he's a rubber stamp anyway. << Tamee: A couple more details: Wimsey's mother was 1/8 French not 1/2. Lord Peter also suffered from PTSS after the war. His valet's name was Bunter, and it was through his care that Lord Peter made through a deep bout of depression and inability to function after the war. I think the strongest parallel between Sayer's detective stories and JKR apart from the liberal use of misdirection and the creation of some memorable characters is the theme of choosing what is right over what is easy. Lord Peter pursues truth regardless of the personal consequences. In one book, it looks like either his brother or his sister may be guilty of murder. In another, he risks losing Harriet in pursuit of a deadly poison pen. In another, the very act of his meddling precipitates the murderer into committing more crimes. Always, there is the determination to see justice carried out. It's the kind of determination I see in Dumbledore, and in Harry too, even when he's wrong, at least he's determined to do what's right despite the consequences. Tamee mostly lurking nowadays and a great fan of Sayers, JKR, and Jane Austen. From jmrazo at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 20:13:15 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:13:15 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127798 She is not a sympathetic listener. He > hides his feelings from her and confides in others. All in all, > Harry needs someone else for a girlfriend. He needs Hermione to be > just who she is ? she is important to him as she is even though it > means she is not girlfriend material. The essay "D'You Really Think > They're Suited?" at HP Lexicon documents all these points and is well > worth reading, if you can make it through 30 pages. All good points. I never really understood how people can ship Harry/Hermione. They have all the sexual chemistry of a pair of wet blankets. Besides since the books are all from Harry's pov I think it would be pretty difficult to conceal having a crush on his best female friend. we saw H/cho coming three books away. I think we'll see whoever Harry dates coming a mile away. And so far since Harry hasn't really looked at another girl, that could be anyone. > JKR will pay a lot more attention to the > plot about Voldemort and make romance a side issue at best. (In the > end, Cho was just a side plot in OOTP.) This is an adventure series, > not teenage romance novels. So there probably will be a > little "gratuitous romance," as it were, but nothing serious. All > shippers are probably not going to be happy. That's what leads me to think that H/Ginny wouldn't happen, or in the very least be a lasting ship. Ginny figures pretty prominently in my overall Voldemort Theory for the rest of the series. I think Voldemort put part of his soul or power into Ginny and its my theory that in book seven he's going to try (maybe succed) kidnapping her with Harry coming to the rescue. In any case Ginny is going to figure prominently and she cannot be both important to the story and the romantic interest if romance is only going to be *light*. Rescuing his girlfriend would elevate the ship to something much more serious than the casual dating I think JK is going for with her ships. But we shall see. phoenixgod2000 From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Apr 19 20:48:01 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:48:01 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127799 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" > wrote: > > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > > > > bboyminn: > > > > > > I'm not sure if this solves the problem entirely, but in England > > > all 11 year old kids leave school. .... > > > Geoff: > > Excuse my being pedantic, but large numbers of pupils change schools > > at 13+ and some at 12+. The percentage of transfers at 11+ is far > > less than it was in the past. > > > > ....edited... > > > > End of education history lesson. :-) > > > > Geoff > > bboyminn: > > Thanks Geoff, I knew there were people in the group who had more > direct experience than I did, and hoped one or more would expand on > the idea with more accurate details. My knowledge comes mostly from > bits and pieces picked up in our many education discussions. > > Curious though, what are your thoughts on the level of monitoring and > the ease with which Hogwart's students could slip through the cracks. > Even when students change schools, the old school would likely get a > request from the new school for student transripts and records which > would indicate to the old school that the students were still in some > school somewhere. Would that be significant enough that the old school > would contact the authorities if that request didn't come? Geoff: This post is an attempt to cover points raised by Steve, Sandra and Tammy among others. If a child transfers to a school in a different area, the old school would normally expect to receive some sort of contact from the new one for records etc. Where students are in years 10 or 11, they will already be taking options for their GCSE (General Certificate of Secondary Education) national exam which they will sit in Year Eleven (the old Fifth Year). The modern GCSEs contain a large amount of course work and, if a pupil transfers into a different area - and possibly a different exam Board, that portfolio of work is vital for the student's final grade. Again, if a younger pupil changes schools, data on their Standard Assessment Tests (SATs) - which are carried out at a specific group of ages - will have to be passed on. So, strictly speaking, there should be a contact between the two schools. Hwoever, it is possible that this link may not be established. A child might leave the country with its parents and move to a totally different overseas system. There are often problems with the children of Travellers. These are groups of folk, sometimes including gypsies, who move around the countryside, camping or settling for short periods, usually in rural areas. Their children will often drop in (and out) of the education system and it can be quite difficult to keep tabs on them. If a parent chooses to withdraw a pupil for home tuition, then the LEA in coperation with Social Services would be expected to monitor progress. It is possible that a family would move without warning (Sometimes called "doing a moonlight flit") and in those circumstances, a student could just disappear off the radar. Vernon Dursley might have notified the local school that Harry had transferred to St.Brutus' in which case his old school might be awaiting a contact. There are places here where the link might depend on how meticulous staff are in following up children who have "disappeared". If a new school seems unwilling to contact for details it might depend on the ability of a teacher in the old school to keep trying to contact and whether under the pressure of other work, the item gets lower down the "Pending" tray. Away from schools, there have been a number of incidents involving children where Social Service Departments have been understaffed and overworked and cases have slipped though the net. There is, of course, the suggestion made by RedLena that the records of Muggle children going to Hogwarts be magically "adjusted" at the appropriate time. I hope that will clear up some of the items raised. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 20:49:14 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:49:14 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127800 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Richard Jones" wrote: and I have to say that the anti-HH essay had the > strongest arguments. Harry certainly loves Hermione like a friend > and would give his life to save her, but his reactions to her do not > indicate any boyfriend-girlfriend type interest on his part at all. GEO: Yes, but a lot of the arguments for the H/Hr ship has been that the potential and opportunity for a romantic relationship is greater between the two of them because of their great friendship as many have acknowledged and a certain lack of chemistry and attraction in my opinion certainly doesn't nullify or sink the H/Hr ship. > Of course, Hermione's personality might change radically (like the > revelation of Ginny in OOTP), but unless that happens there is no > reason to think that she is the type of girl that Harry would be > looking for for a girlfriend. GEO: And out of curiosity by what authority have you managed to divine what kind of girl that Harry is looking for? So far from his limited romantic experiences, it looks like he is picking them more for appearance or superficial qualities than for their actual character, which is surely going to end up in disaster for him. > He needs her as a friend, but he is > more annoyed by her bossy, lecturing, and nagging nature than > attracted to her. Her voice and her way of talking annoy him. GEO: Yes it's strangely so annoying that the voices in his head have begun to take the sound of her voice. And besides her nagging and bossy nature manages to get through to him while the methods of so many others failed. He > avoids her at times, lies to her, and ignores her (usually good) > advice. GEO: If you haven't noticed, Harry is somewhat of a git in OOTP no doubt due to a combination of growing up, having his mental connection with Voldemort strengthened, and having Umbridge trying to perpetually make his life a living nightmare. So far Hermione wasn't the only one he has mistreated during that time . She doesn't laugh at his jokes (which is more important than > it sounds). GEO: Please elaborate. I'm rather curious on how that detracts from a potential harry and hermione relationship. > They do not have fun together when Harry needs someone > to give him a few laughs. GEO: What he needs is someone that will try to ensure his mental stability and physical safety. So far having someone to lighten the mood seems to be Ron's job. Of course if Rowling is liberal minded enough, it could be Ron/Harry instead. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 21:26:55 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 21:26:55 -0000 Subject: Remus Lupin boring? Elkins' musings. Was :Re: Things I like about Harry (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127801 Alla wrote earlier: 32. Remus Lupin. I cannot believe that at one point of my "potterholic" career I considered Remus to be a boring character. Phoenixgod2000: A rare note of disagreement. I think Lupin is boring. A nice guy and a good teacher but I find him more than a little dull. Sirius on the other hand... Alla: You know, even when we disagree, I can see your POV so clearly. J I used to like Sirius SO much more than Remus, because indeed I considered him a to be a boring character. I still like Sirius very much, but Remus is grown on me significantly in the "excitement department". His "excitement" is more subtle than Sirius', but it is there , IMO. Actually that will be a perfect excuse for me to dig up another one of Elkins' posts, where she is wondering what parts of Remus personality could make James and Sirius suspect him as spy. J I suspect that Pippin got at least some of her inspiration for ESE! Lupin from that post. Apologies to Pippin if I am wrong. Elkins does not go that far though. Without further ado, here it is. Message 35040 by Elkins. Enjoy it OR not. "Why suspect Lupin?" Mahoney wrote: > On another subject, has anyone speculated that as for Black having > suspected Lupin as being the spy, there might have been some reason > related to, I dunno, Lupin's personality that suggested it? I.e., > something other than, say, general distrust of werewolves? I have. "'They call it the Dementor's Kiss,' said Lupin, with a slightly twisted smile." Ooooh, yes. There's *definitely* a dark streak to Lupin's character. He's got Edge, which is one of the reasons that I like him so much. (Without his Edge, he'd be a bit sappy, if you ask me. Far too *nice.* Too...well, too ewww to be trewww, shall we say.) I don't think that Lupin's werewolf status was the only reason that he was suspected at all. Not by a long shot. But then, I think that it may be hard to separate Lupin's dark side from his lycanthropy when we talk about the reasons his friends may have had for coming to suspect him -- or for that matter, even when we talk about our *own* feelings about him. That notion of "the wolf is always there, even when you can't see it" is far too central to even our own werewolf mythos, let alone that of the Potterverse. Mahoney: > I Was thinking...the 'Jekyll & Hyde' type is one way of looking at > Lupin; but what if he's less split down the middle? What if he's > actually a bit...wolfy? He acts mild-mannered and nice, because he > *is* generally mild-mannered and nice; but even the mild-mannered > nice people can have dark emotions and urges. Yes. I think that if we didn't know that Lupin were a werewolf that Edge of his would still be an evident aspect of his character, but the fact that we *do* know -- as did the Marauders -- makes it all that much harder to ignore. Still Mahoney: > And if he had a bit of a wicked streak, which he only let his close > friends see, it would make more sense for Black to think that Lupin > was the type to maybe be amenable to Voldemort's ways and thus > become a spy. Well, I think that we get to see quite a few signs of Lupin's "wicked streak" in PoA, and that they do make it easier to imagine how Black could have come to suspect nice, mild-mannered, intellectual Remus as the spy in their midst. After all, *we* suspected him, didn't we? ;-) Leaving aside the question of his capabilities (Lupin is certainly both clever enough and sufficiently emotionally-controlled to have been an effective spy), and of his social vulnerability (aside from the lycanthropy itself, the fact that Lupin's condition renders him effectively chronically-ill and terminally-nemployed would have made him far more vulnerable than any of the others to temptation by offers of financial security or enhanced social standing), and focusing instead purely on questions of character, I see a number of things which might have made him seem suspect. For starters, he's apparently chosen to specialize in the Dark Arts (er...*Defense* Against Dark Arts, that is). It's not clear whether he was drawn to this field because of being a werewolf or in spite of it, but either way it's a little suspicious, and would surely have seemed far more so during the days of Voldemort's reign. Then there's his sense of humor. It's dry, but it can also be a little bit black: "Professor Lupin had come back. He paused as he entered, looked around, and said, with a small smile, 'I haven't poisoned that chocolate, you know...'" Of course he's joking, and the humor there is primarily self- deprecating: Lupin knows full well that to the students he must appear somewhat disreputable. It's a joke designed to release tension and put the kids more at ease with him, and it works beautifully. But it is a little dark. His demeanor when practicing magic is casual in a way that could be read as indicative of darkness as well. On more than one occasion in PoA, JKR uses the word "lazy" or "lazily" to refer to aspects of Lupin's wand work. This speaks to his competence, of course, but it's also a trifle unsettling, because "lazily" is a loaded word in the Potter books. It's how Snape speaks when he is being deliberately cruel; it's the adverb consistently applied to the Malfoy drawl. And in GoF, voldemort gets an awful lot of "lazily" as well. "Lazily" is how the Potterverse's sadistic characters behave. In JKR's idiom, it's really a neutral word at all. Then there's also Lupin's tendency to speak of dark matters in a cool, light, or even breezy fashion. The angrier or more upset he is -- or the more potentially emotionally upsetting the subject under discussion -- the lighter and milder his tone becomes. We see that whenever he has to deal with Snape's unpleasantness, we see it in Shrieking Shack when he responds to Hermione's outing him as a werewolf, and we see a lot of it whenever he talks to Harry about the dementors. When Harry asks him why the dementors came to the Quiddich match, for example: "'They're getting hungry,' said Lupin coolly, shutting his briefcase with a snap." That "coolly" sort of chills the blood, doesn't it? And he gets even worse when he tells Harry about the Dementor's Kiss. There's the "slightly twisted smile," of course, but even beyond that, Lupin's entire tone as he describes the Kiss is light, casual, breezy; it's very nearly bemused. There is, of course, nothing in the least bit "wicked" about using this technique to disconnect from upsetting matters; it's a form of emotional self-protection. But it's a habit that is horribly prone to being misinterpreted by others. It can all too easily be misread as callousness or inhumanity, or even as cruelty. (I've had a lot of personal experience with this one, as I share Lupin's tendency to take on a facetious tone when angry or upset, or when discussing distressing subjects. There have been many times when I've discovered -- much to my dismay -- that somebody I'd *thought* I was getting along with quite well had actually come away from a conversation absolutely convinced that I must be a truly horrible and cruel and uncaring person. It's always a bit of a shocker, when that happens.) Of course, you'd think that Sirius and the Potters would have known Lupin well enough not to be dismayed by that sort of thing, but...you never know. Horrible things were happening. I can easily imagine how Lupin's breezy and off-hand manner when discussing, say, somebody that the group actually *knew* having been tortured or murdered might have given even his friends pause, particularly if they were already becoming suspicious of him for other reasons. Even Lupin's compassion could, viewed in a certain light, make him seem a little suspicious, because it's a compassion born of sensitivity and insight, of the ability to "read" others, to deduce other people's personal vulnerabilities and motives. Lupin's very good at that; it's what makes him a good teacher. But that form of sensitivity can also be a rather unnerving trait, particularly in a paranoid situation, one in which there are *secrets* that must be kept hidden. On a certain level, an emotionally astute individual *is* a spy -- he knows your secrets...or at least he makes you feel as if he does -- and I don't think that it did much for the others' sense of security around Lupin. I think that his very sensitivity probably made him seem suspect. When we're talking about Darkness, also, I think that Lupin's sensitivity to others is one of his most suspect character traits because while wisely used that sort of sensitivity can lead to compassion, used with ill-intent it turns to sadism. If you can tell where somebody's vulnerabilities lie, then you may know how to help them, but you also really know how to *hurt* them. And while Lupin rarely uses his sensitivity cruelly, he certainly does know *how* to do it. His rebuke to Harry at the end of Chapter 14 -- "Your parents gave their lives to keep you alive..." -- is devestatingly effective. It's also slightly... Well, intent is everything here. Lupin truly believes that murderous Black is trying to hunt Harry down, and the kid really *isn't* taking the threat as seriously as he ought to be. But if Lupin's comment hadn't been delivered with such undeniably good intent, if the context had been different, then one might even be tempted to call it "vicious." Lupin really does know how to target the jugular, and there are times when I get the definite sense that he's got a bit of a taste for it as well. He's not a sadist...but he could be, and if he ever did go bad, I think that's exactly how he'd do it. It does come across as a "dark streak" to his personality, IMO, and I can easily imagine how that aspect of his character could have made him seem highly suspect. Of course, where I think that Lupin's capacity for sadism comes across the most clearly is in Shrieking Shack. Others, I know, have disagreed with my reading of Lupin's lines there -- we had a thread on this a little while back, and it reached an impasse pretty quickly -- but I still maintain that in Shrieking Shack, Lupin's anger has pushed him to the brink of sadism. Everyone gets bestial at the end of PoA, of course -- that's the entire point -- but Lupin's particular *mode* of beast-ness does, IMO, come across as considerably more "Dark" than either Sirius or Pettigrew's respective forms of beastliness. So...um, yeah. I do think that there are a lot of things about Lupin's character other than his lycanthropy that might have tempted Black and the Potters to suspect him as the spy. There's a streak of Darkness there, to be sure. Good thing, too, 'cause otherwise he wouldn't be nearly so interesting. Or nearly so sexy. -- Elkins, to whom never even *occurred* that others might find anyone but Lupin the sexpot character of the older generation, and who was shocked -- just shocked! -- to learn otherwise. ("'Sirius Is Dead Sexy?'" she read to herself, and then blinked in confusion. "Sirius?" she repeated blankly. '*Sirius?* Is that...that's a joke, right?" Then she remembered the flying motorcycle, and nodded to herself. 'Ah,' she thought. 'Okay. I guess some people do like that sort of thing.') (We won't even get into her response when she discovered the Snape-Is- Sexy people.) That was a public service announcement made by Alla. From lhuntley at fandm.edu Tue Apr 19 21:39:39 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 17:39:39 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7ebcfbfc615353f1cdeeef518aaa4f80@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 127802 Richard Jones: >> She doesn't laugh at his jokes (which is more important than >> it sounds). GEO: > Please elaborate. I'm rather curious on how that detracts from > a potential harry and hermione relationship. And I'm rather curious about instances of Harry making jokes. I'm not saying he *doesn't*, mind you, it's just that I don't remember him doing so. I guess he makes rather wry comments from time to time, but I can't think of anything that would illicit laughter from the average companion (i.e. not Luna ^_^). If anyone tells jokes that Hermione doesn't approve of, it's Ron. And yet, R/Hers cite her annoyance as veiled attraction. *winsome smile* Eh, to each his own. Laura From bboyminn at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 22:10:31 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:10:31 -0000 Subject: ... muggle-borns... off the radar? St. Brutus Academy of Naughty Boys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127803 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: > > Tammy: > > ...edited... After all, Harry is supposedly going to St. Brutus' and > they don't sound like a place most people would question. bboyminn: Slight shift in subject, but still related. I have always assumed and assumed that others assumed that St Brutus Academy of Naughty Naughty Boys ;) was a complete figment of Vernon's imagination. I think Harry was originally slated to go to (?)Stonewall Academy(?), but when he went to Hogwarts instead, Vernon fabricated St Brutus as a cover story for the nosey neighbors and relatives. Am I alone in this thought? Steve/bboyminn From a_svirn at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 22:23:06 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:23:06 -0000 Subject: ... muggle-borns... off the radar? St. Brutus Academy of Naughty Boys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127804 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tammy" wrote: > > > > > Tammy: > > > > ...edited... After all, Harry is supposedly going to St. Brutus' and > > they don't sound like a place most people would question. > > bboyminn: > > Slight shift in subject, but still related. I have always assumed and > assumed that others assumed that St Brutus Academy of Naughty Naughty > Boys ;) was a complete figment of Vernon's imagination. I think Harry > was originally slated to go to (?)Stonewall Academy(?), but when he > went to Hogwarts instead, Vernon fabricated St Brutus as a cover story > for the nosey neighbors and relatives. > > Am I alone in this thought? > > Steve/bboyminn a_svirn: I always thought that St. Brutus was invented for the sole benefit of Marge who, judging by her firm belief in existing of corporeal punishment in schools, seems to live in a time-wrap. I don't think that his neighbours would buy the story much less that he would attempt to sell it. a_svirn From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 22:24:37 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 15:24:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050419222437.76890.qmail@web53902.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127805 Geoff wrote: If a child transfers to a school in a different area, the old school would normally expect to receive some sort of contact from the new one for records etc. Lynn: This is not the experience I've had since coming to England. My daughter goes to an international school. When we considered putting her into the English school system last year, we were told that it was our responsibility to obtain her school records and submit them even though the international school is located in England. We are informed by her present school when records are available to be picked up by those who are not returning to the school. Therefore, it could be quite easy for me to inform the old school that I needed my daughter's school records as she was going to a new school without ever having to enroll her in a new school. Of course, it may be due to our not being in the English system at present and that would change once she enters the system. I do have to say that our foray into learning about the English system was a real eye opener. The reason she's not in the English system now is because the only school that had an opening at that time was just as far as the school she goes to now so we decided to leave her where she is. test'; "> --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 13:49:42 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:49:42 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127806 Potioncat: As far as careers go, who would think something as boring as banking could be so exciting? In the WW you earn hazard pay! (Apologies to bankers on the list.)We haven't seen a lot of the adult world of Magic. And what we've seen has been through Harry's eyes. He hasn't had the chance to really see life outside of Hogwarts. To me the WW must be pretty neat if witches and wizards of DD's age are still mentally alert, physically active and involved in meaningful pursuits. > > Potioncat...humming the tune to Mr. Ed for some unknown reason. Sandra replies: Aha, that's a good angle, which ties in with my point about JKR not addressing the simple aspects of the WW even though Harry's rapidly approaching the time when he needs to have a few options ahead of him. Bear in mind Hermione's done much of his homework for him, he's average at most subjects and he's missed a few exams in his time. I think another reason I've set this one going is that I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was a story or two beyond Book Seven - I think the scope there would be enormous, but is currently limited due to the lack of background for the WW. I wouldn't be at all surprised if JKR only had an 'Executive Editor' role in the stories after 7. Incidentally, 'Potioncat' is about the best name on this site! I wish I'd thought of one. Sandra (singing 'A horse is a horse, of course a horse..) Quigonginger wrote: I guess what I'm trying to say is that Hogwarts education would be pretty useless to us Muggles, but it is what they need in the WW. > Ginger, who is pushing 40 and has to find a new career due to back problems. Where's Hogwarts when you need it? Hi Ginger, what a really good reply, thank you! There's been some really interesting ones on this, and one or two I'd rather not mention. It's not a crime to raise questions, folks. Anyway, I go along with your points that muggle-born witches and wizards have an advantage in some respects over the pure-bloods, but it would be a double edged sword for them if they start to miss the muggle world. But what about the summer holidays? For example, if Hermione met her muggle friends in the muggle world during the summer vacation, what could she ever say to them? She wouldn't be able to tell them about where she's been for the last year, she'd know nothing of their academic year (and being left behind academically would drive her round the twist), and again she couldn't say anything about what she's been learning. That situation would be a touch tricky for anyone. So all muggle-borns who return home would have to be very, very careful about interacting with any muggles! There's a tough call for anyone. By the way, have you tried a chiropractor about your back? My father was in a similar situaton to you (ie change of career due to his back) and a good professional worked some little miracles! Sandra (hoping your back improves very soon) From j_samudio at hotmail.com Tue Apr 19 17:34:12 2005 From: j_samudio at hotmail.com (jomarelvy) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 17:34:12 -0000 Subject: Neville's wand In-Reply-To: <42646D52.80108@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127807 Jazmyn wrote: > Ron was using his brother's old wand when he started too. Not > every kid can afford a shiny new wand for school, after all. > People likely read far too much into that 'wand chooses the > wizard' thing. Neville was using Hermione's wand after his broke, Sirius was using other peoples wands just fine and when Harry got > his wand, he was so new to the magic thing, he had never had a bit > of training yet, so maybe IF you can afford a new wand, then waving > a number around till one feels right is best. I have no reason to believe the wands are sentient at all and 'chose' anything and believe that it's 'just an expression' that the wand chooses the wizard, not to be taken literally. Much like with musical instruments, the violin chooses the musician really means you try several till one 'feels' right, it doesn't mean the violin points > at someone and says 'him'.. > > Note that there are second hand wands sold too, meaning that wands can be resold and I suspect that some wizards might have more than one wand for specializing in certain types of magic, such as people who enchant things for a living. The wand is not a sentient thing, it's a tool, just like a hammer or a wrench. As a contractor, I > can tell you that we do have our 'favorite' tools, which are ones that work best for certain types of jobs or feel right in the hand when working. I see the wands only as tools, not anything else. > Jomarelvy here: The 'wand chooses the wizard' thing seems to me as more than a simple expression. The quite few pages that JKR devoted in chapter 5 of book 1 to Harry's buying his wand supports my idea that the wand is in fact a very personal thing and more than a mere tool. I used to believe that JKR uses the wands to symbolize the personality and virtues/characteristics of each wizard. My hunch was confirmed when she explains what kind of wood she gave Harry's and Hagrid's wands (JKR's site Extra Stuff-WANDS). Therefore, when JKR says that 'it is the wand that chooses the wizard', I think she is saying that a wand's wood, core and length must suit the wizard's personality. However, we have not been told so far the characteristics in Neville's wand (his father's old). But we DO know what Neville's like and we have been TOLD that Neville is not like his father. This is why I believe Neville's magic has not been too good. Now, I also believe that it is the magic WITHIN the wizard that makes it all work. If the wizard (i.e. Neville, Ron, Peter Pettigrew)lacks confidence, the expected outcome is rather poor. When the wizard feels confident, the magic is good, that would probably explain why Neville did well using Hermione's wand at the end of OOTP. We had never seen such a courageous and confident Neville. Personally, I hope JKR will tell details of Neville's new wand in book 6 (unless he now uses his mother's old -lol), but I have the feeling that Neville can certainly afford a new wand and I expect it will match the two sides of Neville's personality: oblivious and caring, yet courageous and loyal. From angelicfront5 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 18:43:29 2005 From: angelicfront5 at yahoo.com (Lauren Thibeault) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 11:43:29 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050419184329.33197.qmail@web31805.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127808 Sandra: > So when, for example, the Potters and the Grangers > send their > Harry and Hermione off to Hogwarts, what do they > tell the local > authorities? Suddenly the kids aren't at school > anywhere, and > there's no record any longer of either of them > getting an > education. I assume the parents or guardians can > still draw > child benefit payments, so either England is an easy > country to > 'lose' your kids, or it's something else JKR > overlooked. Or I did. I always assume when matters like this come up that JKR makes some assumptions that we can just guess, (educatedly) that magic is involved. We are speaking about the magic world after all. If the entire Witch and Wizarding world and keep themselves secret they must be able to do certian things to "cover their tracks" so to speak. The modify memories all the time. I don't expect JKR to explain all of these tiny details, I expect that she assumes we don't need everything handed to us and that we are intelligent enough to figure out some things for ourselves. Just my humble opinion. :) "Lauren" From siskiou at vcem.com Tue Apr 19 23:00:57 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:00:57 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1099589038.20050419160057@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127809 Hi, Tuesday, April 19, 2005, 1:49:14 PM, greatelderone wrote: > GEO: Yes it's strangely so annoying that the voices in his head have > begun to take the sound of her voice. And besides her nagging and > bossy nature manages to get through to him while the methods of so > many others failed. I don't find it strange at all that the voice in Harry's head sometimes sounds like Hermione. After all, said voice usually gives him advice, or "pesters" him about something or other, which goes along very nicely with Hermione's role in general. I can't recall anything about the "Hermione-voice" being connected to feelings of romance, and frankly, I'm sometimes annoyed with the way Harry thinks of Hermione. For example, when he sees the fountain he thinks of her reaction to the way the house-elf statue looks at the wizard, while he pours his money in. To me it always felt like making fun of her feelings regarding the house elves, but hiding this when he speaks to her about the matter in person (for example coming up with a lame excuse when she invites him to knit house elf clothes, instead of telling her that he is just not interested). -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 18:58:53 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (sandra87b) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:58:53 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127810 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "redlena_web" wrote: For anyone who might think this is unlikely because of the effort involved in locating the appropriate documents and people to "adjust," remember that potentially Hogwarts-bound children are identified upon birth. Those responsible for the magical altering of the small portion of students for whom this would be necessary would have 11 years in which to track where the efforts would be needed. > Anyway, that's my idea, any comments? Sandra replied: That's a well-thought out one, Red! But wouldn't there be a problem in the holidays? The muggle kids return to muggle land, where old friends and neighbours would undoubtedly speak to them, and that would leave the kids with some tricky questions to answer, eg 'where have you been?' or even 'What subjects are you doing' etc. Unless there's a memory charm on all muggles, at which point Hogwarts and Dumbledore are getting a bit sinister! And if that charm were to be abused, as all charms could (depending on who was invoking it) think of the abuses that could be unleashed on the muggle world. Sandra (going down one long path here!) From mfterman at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 20:43:44 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:43:44 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127811 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "redlena_web" wrote: > Since the Muggle-born/raised students like Harry and Hermione > are transferring to Hogwarts, a *magic* school, I would presume > that the explanation of their disappearance from the Muggle > school system would be magical. Yes and no. I tend to subscribe to the simplest theory possible. > Memory charms, magically altered documents and the like, > possibly by some office of the Ministry of Magic, could be used to > adjust the records of a particular student who otherwise would > seem to have "disappeared." Perhaps the records would even > be expunged... removing any reference to the particular child, so > there'd be no reason for any Muggle authority to seek out the > records of said child. The problem is that Hermione Granger exists in a huge list of different files. Sooner or later someone would find a discrepancy. > For anyone who might think this is unlikely because of the effort > involved in locating the appropriate documents and people to > "adjust," remember that potentially Hogwarts-bound children are > identified upon birth. Those responsible for the magical altering > of the small portion of students for whom this would be > necessary would have 11 years in which to track where the > efforts would be needed. Even so, they'd be constantly using magic to expunge a huge number of records and there's always the possibility that they'll miss something important. No, there's a much simpler way: register Hogwarts with the Muggle authorities as a British public school (that is, it's independently financed, not open to the general public, etc.). Harry and Hermione have Muggle school transcripts which are probably based on their actual grades translated somehow. Muggle-borns thus never drop off the radar, or even Half-bloods who attended a Muggle primary school. They simple in the records transfer to an obscure public school in Scotland and that takes care of that. Makes life easier for the parents as well. mfterman From mfterman at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 20:51:27 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:51:27 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127812 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > All good points. I never really understood how people can ship > Harry/Hermione. They have all the sexual chemistry of a pair of wet > blankets. Besides since the books are all from Harry's pov I think > it would be pretty difficult to conceal having a crush on his best > female friend. we saw H/cho coming three books away. I think we'll > see whoever Harry dates coming a mile away. And so far since Harry > hasn't really looked at another girl, that could be anyone. Harry/Hermione strikes me as one of those situations where they say "I like that boy, and I like that girl, wouldn't it be nice if they got together as a couple?" without actually thinking of whether they would actually work it out. Often people identify with one of the characters and want them to end up with the other major character who they like and so they push it as well. > That's what leads me to think that H/Ginny wouldn't happen, or in > the very least be a lasting ship. Ginny figures pretty prominently > in my overall Voldemort Theory for the rest of the series. I think > Voldemort put part of his soul or power into Ginny and its my theory > that in book seven he's going to try (maybe succed) kidnapping her > with Harry coming to the rescue. In any case Ginny is going to > figure prominently and she cannot be both important to the story and > the romantic interest if romance is only going to be *light*. > Rescuing his girlfriend would elevate the ship to something much > more serious than the casual dating I think JK is going for with her > ships. But we shall see. We'll see. I tend to think it's going to be Ginny because of events in OotP. Ginny is the one person who has on two separate occasions pulled Harry out of a very dark mood indeed. She even got him to apologize for his bad behavior one of the times. She's very good at dealing with Harry in a dark mood and she understands him better than anyone else, due to her own experiences with Riddle's diary. Luna is a dark horse, but I think she's been more introduced to be something of an oracle and comic relief, as well as a foil for Hermione. mfterman From shunrata at gmail.com Tue Apr 19 21:05:41 2005 From: shunrata at gmail.com (Shunra Shunrata) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:05:41 +0300 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? References: Message-ID: <01b601c54523$90a743a0$0100000a@Imma> No: HPFGUIDX 127813 | Geoff: | If a child transfers to a school in a different area, the old school | would normally expect to receive some sort of contact from the new | one for records etc. I've often wondered about a related question - how do the Muggle families themselves go about explaining their children's whereabouts to friends and family? Harry is an orphan whose aunt and uncle manage to cover up his presence at Hogwarts, not least because they make sure Harry has zero social life while at Privet Drive. But what about, say, Hermione's dentist parents? Don't her proud grandparents want to know if there's going to be another professional in the family? Don't her old school friends want to keep in touch? What do they tell their friends when the subject turns to their children's schooling? Maybe the Muggle school records can be "magicked", but explaining where your child disappears to for ten straight months must be pretty difficult. Shunra From DANCERWH86 at aol.com Tue Apr 19 22:06:07 2005 From: DANCERWH86 at aol.com (DANCERWH86 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:06:07 -0400 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts-Plenty of Opportunity In-Reply-To: <1113941633.60031.33529.m27@yahoogroups.com> References: <1113941633.60031.33529.m27@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C713431F0320AD-C8C-DEA6@mblk-d11.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127814 > Sandra continues: > > If...the Weasleys ... fancied becoming either an investment banker, > > a vet or a chemical engineer (no, really) he would have to go right > > back to square one and waste quite a few years catching up ... Well, if someone did choose to go in to a completley different field following Wizard training it wouldn't be so unheard of. I had an English teacher who's undergraduate degree was in geography of Near Eastern Countries (No joke). So she clearly took a very different path. I went to prep school and am now studying the arts in college (something not stressed at my school)...So yeah I had to catch up a little, but it was worth it. I would say the chances of purebloods wanting to work in the muggle world is unlikely since they have limited knowledge of the world and muggle-borns will won't a chance at this world they didn't know existed. Lindsay ~~~~~ I once saw a forklift lift a crate of forks. And it was way too literal for me! ~Mitch Hedberg [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 19 23:32:49 2005 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:32:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why do I love OOTP so much? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050419233249.47067.qmail@web53509.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127815 I loved OOtP because it was *uncomfortable*. That is a very uncomfortable age. It is called growing pains for a reason. I feel JKR put that whole phase in most of our lives into words very well. moonmyyst (who barely remembers going throught that phase - it was back when the dinosaurs roamed - but who's youngest son is about to go through it - YAH!!! Only one left!!!) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Apr 20 00:19:50 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:19:50 -0000 Subject: Neville's wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127816 > Jomarelvy here: My hunch was > confirmed when she explains what kind of wood > she gave Harry's and Hagrid's wands (JKR's site Extra Stuff-WANDS). > Therefore, when JKR says that 'it is the wand that chooses the > wizard', I think she is saying that a wand's wood, core and length > must suit the wizard's personality. Potioncat: Ron's new wand had the same core as the old one. Although I don't know if we ever knew what the old wand's wood was. (Try saying that fast!) So the old one may have been a close fit already. Were we ever told the details of Frank's wand? While we didn't see a drastic change in Ron's wand waving, we also weren't given much opportunity to see any. It will be interesting to see how Neville does now. From dontask2much at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 00:34:37 2005 From: dontask2much at yahoo.com (Charme) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:34:37 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Allowable reader responce was Re: Disapointed in Potter? References: Message-ID: <000d01c54540$bc426ae0$6501a8c0@MITRE.ORG> No: HPFGUIDX 127817 >>justcarol67 said: >> And the same is true for me and for all of us. >> >> I expect that I'll be disappointed in some aspects of HBP and even >> more aspects of Book 7. JKR can't possibly want what I want for every >> character. But she will only be "wrong" if she violates her own rules. >> As long as the plot is credible within the bounds of the secondary >> world she has created, as long as the characters' actions are in >> character, she is perfectly "right" to write the books as she pleases. >> And we are "wrong" to call her decisions "mistakes" if she follows her >> own rules. >> > Lupinlore responded: > Well, we will have to disagree on that one. There is no "wrong" in > reader response as long as the reader is honestly expressing his/her > own perception and judgment. And that includes perceptions and > judgments of what constitutes poor writing, i.e. mistakes. This will, > of course, lead to a flurry of widely varying opinions and criticisms, > some of them severe. An author might well get confused and depressed > over it, if they are paying attention (which they do not have to do). > However, it is part and parcel of the writing culture, at least in > America, and writers are well-advised to suck it up and get used to it > and learn to deal with it in their own way. Certainly paying no > attention to critics is a legitimate method of dealing with this > situation. That makes the criticisms no less legitimate, however. Charme now: I have been watching this thread ever since it started, and have held off responding to anything until I had a "moment" to think about it. That said, I've had my thinking moment (yes, ya'll definitely saw smoke - fear not, I have not melted or exploded, thankyouverymuch) and here I am. Criticism is one thing, but moral postulating is quite another. While I personally accept people have their own opinions and express them, I don't necessarily agree that every opinion or expression is "right" especially if it smacks of moral superiority. I think some posters have a tendency to flavor their opinions with value judgements and moral stances which they wish you to believe is the proper and "right" interpretation and that their interpretations are indicative of a flawed moral character of the author - sorry, that simply isn't true. If you have to believe everyone's opinion is "right" because they have the freedom to express it, you have to give the author some due, too - millions of readers, movies, Internet message boards like this, fan clubs...it can't be she's totally wrong, now can it? Too many people like what she writes, otherwise we all probably wouldn't be here. It's weird how some people appear to attempt to opine the "correct and moral" way JKR should tell the story and in essence, seek to make JKR see the error of her ways and write or structure her writing differently to accommodate them. Just like it's their "right" to express that opinion, it's my right to ignore it and move on. Back to the Invisibility Cloak... Charme From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net Wed Apr 20 02:23:29 2005 From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Richard Jones) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 02:23:29 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: <7ebcfbfc615353f1cdeeef518aaa4f80@fandm.edu> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127818 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote: > Richard Jones: > >> She doesn't laugh at his jokes (which is more important than > >> it sounds). > > GEO: > > Please elaborate. I'm rather curious on how that detracts from > > a potential harry and hermione relationship. > > And I'm rather curious about instances of Harry making jokes. I'm not > saying he *doesn't*, mind you, it's just that I don't remember him > doing so. I guess he makes rather wry comments from time to time, but > I can't think of anything that would illicit laughter from the average > companion (i.e. not Luna ^_^). > > If anyone tells jokes that Hermione doesn't approve of, it's Ron. And > yet, R/Hers cite her annoyance as veiled attraction. *winsome smile* > Eh, to each his own. > > Laura Richard: That article at the HP Lexicon that I mentioned -- "D'You Really Think They're Suited?" -- quotes a couple of pages worth of jokes that Harry makes in all the books to try to break the tension or to lighten his dark mood. Ron and Ginny and everyone else except Hermione laughs at his jokes. The article gives a good argument that Harry needs a girl who is a "bit more cheerful" (than Cho), to quote Ron, and for the other points I mentioned. Richard Jones From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 03:30:06 2005 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 03:30:06 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help In-Reply-To: <003501c5451c$16655e30$6401a8c0@Lupin> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127819 Tamee said: > I think the strongest parallel between Sayer's detective stories and JKR > apart from the liberal use of misdirection and the creation of some > memorable characters is the theme of choosing what is right over what is > easy. Lord Peter pursues truth regardless of the personal consequences. In > one book, it looks like either his brother or his sister may be guilty of > murder. In another, he risks losing Harriet in pursuit of a deadly poison > pen. In another, the very act of his meddling precipitates the murderer > into committing more crimes. Always, there is the determination to see > justice carried out. It's the kind of determination I see in Dumbledore, > and in Harry too, even when he's wrong, at least he's determined to do > what's right despite the consequences. > > Tamee > mostly lurking nowadays and a great fan of Sayers, JKR, and Jane Austen. Antosha: As another fan of JKR, Jane Austen and Dorothy Sayers, I agree with everything you say here--all three women write compelling stories about characters who MAKE THEMSELVES. Peter Wimsey by all rights should be what he appears to be at first glance--a supercilious fop. In fact, he is a brilliant, principled, deeply interesting character. Having just finished rereading Gaudy Nights, her second-to-last novel, I wish to propose another parallel between the works of Sayers and Austen: compelling, intelligent and independent female protagonists who manage (after much wrangling and misadventure) to work there way into marriage with men who the reader immediately perceives to be perfect for them, even if they don't themselves. The co-protagonist of the last five or so Sayers novels is Harriet Vane, a... writer of mystery novels. Okay, say self-insertion if you must, but she's a wonderful character, as bristly and bright as Elizabeth Bennett, as quick- witted as Emma, as proud and self-abnegating as the main characters in Mansfield Park, Persuasion and Sense and Sensibility. And her relationship with Lord Peter, who proposes marriage to her with the comic regularity of a ticking clock, brings out a depth in his character, in hers and in the books that is quite wonderful. Now there are a number of possible parallels that MIGHT appear in the HP books. Certainly a Ron/Hermione relationship would have Austen/Sayers overtones. For that matter, so would a Hermione/Snape 'ship... though I really hope and trust we aren't going to see that one in canon. (Fun in fics, but PLEASE don't go there, JKR!) Too, I think that if/when Harry's love life shifts into gear, it will deepen his character, giving him a sense of the larger things in life--just as it does Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy, Harriet and Lord Peter. Antosha, who has to run out and find a copy of Busman's Honeymoon (my old one ran off!) From s_ings at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 03:53:34 2005 From: s_ings at yahoo.com (Sheryll Townsend) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 03:53:34 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Staying on topic and being respectful Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127820 Greetings from Hexquarters! As stated in the Humongous Bigfile http://sitepalace.com/hbfile/hbfile.html all posts to the main list should discuss the "canon" that is, the written works of JK Rowling. While it's fine to discuss ways in which you might find HBP to be disappointing, discussion of list management matters, for example, which posts or topics are appropriate for this list, should be sent directly to the list elves at HPforGrownups- owner at yahoogroups.com or posted on HPFGU-Feedback. Please also remember that we are a very diverse community who bring very different experiences and values to the discussion; the fact that another member's opinion is different from yours does not mean that it is not equally valid. Please respect the right of other listmembers to express points of view with which you may not agree, and to avoid sparking a flame war, please clearly indicate your own opinions by using phrases such as "in my opinion" or "I believe." Thanks for your cooperation. Rylly Elf, for the HPfGU Administration Team PS Similarly, replies to this post should not be sent to the main list. From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 20 04:02:34 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:02:34 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <17db5591cccd237a6e0a95963a282d18@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 127821 Laura (me): >> And I'm rather curious about instances of Harry making jokes. I'm not >> saying he *doesn't*, mind you, it's just that I don't remember him >> doing so. I guess he makes rather wry comments from time to time, but >> I can't think of anything that would illicit laughter from the average >> companion (i.e. not Luna ^_^). >> >> If anyone tells jokes that Hermione doesn't approve of, it's Ron. And >> yet, R/Hers cite her annoyance as veiled attraction. *winsome smile* >> Eh, to each his own. Richard Jones: > That article at the HP Lexicon that I mentioned -- "D'You > Really Think They're Suited?" -- quotes a couple of pages worth of > jokes that Harry makes in all the books to try to break the tension > or to lighten his dark mood. Ron and Ginny and everyone else except > Hermione laughs at his jokes. That is NOT TRUE, although it's hardly your fault. Read on. The article (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/essays/essay-hh-suited.html) is extremely misleading in its use of quotes. They're taken out of context to the point that I think the author must have intentionally trying to pull a fast one. The part that you're citing, for example, has a bunch of bulleted quotes under the *bold* heading **Hermione Doesn't Laugh at Harry's Jokes**. It is understandable, then, that you -- as a reader -- would assume that the quotes listed were instances of Harry doing or saying something that caused other people to laugh (and not Hermione). That assumption, however, is Dead Wrong, despite the fact that all of the quotes are snipped so as to give any clue to the actual events surrounding them. Of the **17** scenes quoted, only five have *anything* at all to do with Harry having said/done something, and of those five, only two could be viewed as Harry being intentionally humorous in any way. Also, these two jokes are more of the "wry comments" that I mentioned before, rather than the laugh-out-loud type. The five Harry-related quotes are listed belong with my commentary. All of the other quotes are characters *other than Harry and Hermione* laughing at various random things (for example: Sirius, Tonks, Bill and Charley, the Twins). *** "I didn't mean to," said Harry, while Ron roared with laughter. "I just -- lost control." "It's not funny, Ron," said Hermione sharply. "Honestly, I'm amazed Harry wasn't expelled." (PA47/56) *** This is in reference to blowing up Aunt Marge. Harry's tone in this scene is anything but humorous, and he is not making a joke. Ron laughs because he finds the idea of blowing up someone's aunt funny, and while Hermione wonders why Harry wasn't expelled, it's *Harry* who points out that he was lucky he wasn't *arrested*. I'll also point out that Ron is laughing *at* Harry (although not meanly at all -- Ron tends to see the humor in nearly any situation, so naturally he laughs/jokes more than Harry and Hermione, often quite insensitively, but hardly ever viciously). *** "Are you planning to eat or sleep at all this year, Hermione?" asked Harry, while Ron sniggered. Hermione ignored them. (PA47/57) *** Harry says this while Hermione is explaining that she is taking *every* course offered to third years. I suppose I would call this a joke, or a least a wry, amusing comment, but I'd hardly expect Hermione to laugh at it, as it's sort of at her expense (please don't make me go through the books and find all the time Ron makes jokes at Hermione's expense -- he does so much more pointedly than Harry not four lines after Harry's comment). *** "Maybe he'll believe I'm not enjoying myself once I've got my neck broken or -" "That's not funny," said Hermione quietly. "That's not funny at all." She looked extremely anxious. (GF255/290) *** This quote comes from the famous Rift in GoF. Harry is not joking; he is angry with Ron -- ranting, even -- talking loudly enough to spook a pack of owls. Hermione's "that's not funny" breaks Harry out of his tirade and is NOT an admonishment against Harry for using levity (which he is in no way doing), but rather for talking about having his neck broken like it would show Ron good. Obviously, she's worried that he actually *will* have his neck broken. Laughter of any kind would have been an *incredibly* inappropriate response to Harry's mood in this scene. *** 'Wow, I wonder what it'd be like to have a difficult life?' said Harry sarcastically. Ron laughed, but Hermione frowned. (OP235/261) *** Harry says this in response to Hermione warning him to ignore Malfoy, because (as a prefect) Malfoy could make Harry's life "really difficult." This is the other quote which I feel could fairly be called a joke. *shrugs* Not much to say here. I do think it's an interesting, darkly humorous self-commentary on Harry's part, and it's a gem to readers, but I understand why Hermione didn't find it particularly funny (I think she, as opposed to Ron, has a very firm grasp on how much *truth* there is to it). *** 'I just wish the door would open, I'm sick of standing staring at it -' "That's not funny,' said Hermione sharply. (OP489/554) *** Again, Harry is not joking at all. He is (rather exasperatedly) talking about his dreams, which he is (under Dumbledore's orders) supposed to be suppressing, as they are dangerous. Again, Hermione uses "that's not funny" in the sense of "don't talk like that". I haven't had a chance to go over the rest of the essay quite as thoroughly as this part, but if it's at all as misleading -- no wonder you found the anti-H/Hr case more convincing than the H/Hr case -- they've been cheating! ^_~ Laura From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 20 04:21:25 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:21:25 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: <1099589038.20050419160057@vcem.com> References: <1099589038.20050419160057@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127822 Susanne: > I can't recall anything about the "Hermione-voice" being > connected to feelings of romance, and frankly, I'm sometimes > annoyed with the way Harry thinks of Hermione. > > For example, when he sees the fountain he thinks of her > reaction to the way the house-elf statue looks at the > wizard, while he pours his money in. > > To me it always felt like making fun of her feelings > regarding the house elves, but hiding this when he speaks to > her about the matter in person (for example coming up with a > lame excuse when she invites him to knit house elf clothes, > instead of telling her that he is just not interested). Hi, Susanne! I guess I am going to have to go with a big "Huh?" here in reaction to your reading of that scene. To me, Harry's noticing of the way the statues were portrayed (including the subservient house-elf, but also including the handsome, but blandly wizard and the witch with the "vapid smile like a beauty contest") symbolized his disenfranchisement with the Wizarding World and its cultural knowledge and conventions (in this case he would be *aligning* himself more with Hermione's thinking, if anything). See, when Harry first arrives at the Ministry, he is awed by the grandeur and importance of the place, but most of all he is scared witless that he will be expelled. When he sees the fountain, he desperately promises that if he gets off he will donate all the money he has with him to a good cause (Mungo's) by dumping it into the fountain. After facing the Wizengamot, he makes good on his promise and, taking a closer look at the fountain, essentially realizes its societal implications and assumptions, which is just what Hermione has been urging him and Ron to do all along! I'm actually quite impressed with him in this scene, and I think Hermione would be too. I'd be interested to hear what made you think his behavior in this scene made a mockery of Hermione's beliefs. Laura From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 20 04:40:07 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:40:07 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127823 mfterman: > Harry/Hermione strikes me as one of those situations where they say "I > like that boy, and I like that girl, wouldn't it be nice if they got > together as a couple?" without actually thinking of whether they would > actually work it out. Trust me, we've worked it out. ^_~ > Often people identify with one of the characters > and want them to end up with the other major character who they like > and so they push it as well. Yeah, and H/Hr's have all sorts of dismissive explanations for SHIPping R/Hr, as well. Generally, I find that there are few cut-and-dried explanations for why anyone prefers a certain SHIP. Personally, I suspect it all has to do with one's personality and what one expects a good relationship to be like. > We'll see. I tend to think it's going to be Ginny because of events in > OotP. Ginny is the one person who has on two separate occasions pulled > Harry out of a very dark mood indeed. And Hermione never supports Harry when he's depressed? I'm not saying that Hermione gets sole credit for helping Harry emotionally, by any means, but I don't think *any* of the other characters should get more credit than her and Ron. Luna gets extra props for helping him out in what was probably the *worst* mood he's ever had, when no one else could (although Ron wouldn't let Hermione even *try*). > She even got him to apologize > for his bad behavior one of the times. She's very good at dealing with > Harry in a dark mood and she understands him better than anyone else, > due to her own experiences with Riddle's diary. Actually, Ginny -- along with EVERYONE else at Grimmauld Place, including Ron -- just let Harry stew alone for days thinking that he was crazy and possibly evil. It's *Hermione* who, not moments after arriving (there's still snow in her hair), marches up to where he's hiding and convinces him to come talk to his friends. Also, I'd just like to point out, Ginny's "experiences" are nothing at all like Harry's, and her description of possession (at least the way the mature Voldemort does it) is Dead Wrong. I suspect the only reason Hermione let her get away with this glaring error is the fact that it was an error that nevertheless "proved" to Harry that he was not being possessed. Additionally, if you go back and reread the relevant chapters, it's pretty obvious that Hermione's not exactly being truthful about the reason she came back (piffle, oh, I don't really like skiing) -- I think someone (probably Ron) wrote a letter explaining the situation and asking her to come help. > Luna is a dark horse, but I think she's been more introduced to be > something of an oracle and comic relief, as well as a foil for > Hermione. Luna and Hermione are much like two sides of the same coin. I enjoy both characters very a lot, and hope that they will learn to enjoy and learn from each other in the next two books. ^_^ Laura From siskiou at vcem.com Wed Apr 20 04:43:01 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 21:43:01 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: References: <1099589038.20050419160057@vcem.com> Message-ID: <1297128873.20050419214301@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127824 Hi, Tuesday, April 19, 2005, 9:21:25 PM, Laura wrote: > I'd be interested to hear what made you think his behavior in this > scene made a mockery of Hermione's beliefs. I'd go along with your interpretation had Harry shown *any* hint of having come to these conclusions after the trial. But he still gets annoyed with Spew, he still avoids supporting Hermione with it, and I haven't seen any signs that Harry now feels differently about the issue. I agree that JKR wanted to point out these WW social issues to us the readers (the before/after the trail contrast is quite clear), but I saw Harry grinning at the thought of Hermione's reaction to the statue of the house elf. Nothing about thinkly fondly of her, or realizing how right she was, but more thinking how she would be going off on one of her spew-inspired rants. Harry, and a few (or hopefully many others) will probably get to the point of realizing the problems touched upon in future books, but I don't believe Harry has really understood yet. A glimpse, yes, but nothing too profound at this point. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From stix4141 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 20 05:10:36 2005 From: stix4141 at hotmail.com (stickbook41) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 05:10:36 -0000 Subject: FILK: You-Know-Who Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127825 YOU-KNOW-WHO A filk to the complex and melancholy tune of "Waterloo" by ABBA, on their morose album Waterloo. (I'm pretty sure this song has been done before, but the filk practically wrote itself.) SCENE: GoF?The Parting of the Ways FUDGE: My my, at Godric's Hollow You-Know-Who was vanquished Oh yeah, when Harry Potter finished with him he was nothing more But now Harry's addled his brain Pathetically clinging to fame You-Know-Who? He was defeated, we won the war You-Know-Who? Turned into vapor forevermore You-Know-Who? Couldn't return if he wanted to You-Know-Who? Can't have the public think it is true Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa You-Know-Who? You must have a bad case of d?j? vu DUMBLEDORE: My my, we tried to hold him back but he was stronger Oh yeah, and now it seems our only hope is taking up the fight And how could you ever refuse? You've got to tell people the news FUDGE: You-Know-Who? He was defeated, we won the war You-Know-Who? You'll believe anything, Dumbledore You-Know-Who? Couldn't return if he wanted to You-Know-Who? Can't have the public think it is true Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa You-Know-Who? You must have a bad case of d?j? vu DUMBLEDORE: And how could you be so uncouth You've got to believe it's the truth Voldemort! Giving instructions to Barty Crouch Voldemort! Potion that made him a powerhouse Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa Voldemort! Probably forming an evil plan Voldemort! Death Eater break-out for Azkaban Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa Voldemort! Go to the giants soon as you can -stickbook From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 06:35:32 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:35:32 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: <01b601c54523$90a743a0$0100000a@Imma> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127826 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shunra Shunrata" wrote: > Shunra: > > I've often wondered about a related question - how do the Muggle > families themselves go about explaining their children's whereabouts > to friends and family? ... Don't her proud grandparents want to know > if there's going to be another professional in the family? Don't her > old school friends want to keep in > touch? > > Shunra bboyminn: I think the most obvious answer is that this is an 'off-page' issue that's unrelated to the core story, and therefore, we aren't meant to think about. Even if that is true, to maintain the continuity of this fictional world this is still a very valid question. I suspect Hermione's parents simply say that there daughter is going to a very small, very exclusive, very private, and very specialized school in Northern Scotland. What the school is called creates another problem. I can't believe they could engage in even light conversations about the subject with out people asking the name of the school. There are many schools, like Eaton, that are very prestigious schools, and I just don't see the school name as a question that would go unasked or one whose answer could be avoided indefinitely. So, I suspect they either make up a name or use Hogwarts name just for consistency. As to Hermione's friends, while still a valid question, I don't get the impression that Hermione (bossy know-it-all) had many real close friends. Plus at age 11 (at least in the books) all student break away from their old friends and go off to different schools. Reasonably, like Dudley and his friends, some would indeed end up at the same school, but many would part ways at that time. I suspect when Hermione is asked by her friends what she is studying, she would likely say something like History, and launching into some dry boring description of medieval history at which time her friend's eyes would glaze over, and as quickly as possible they would change the subject to something important like which boy band has the cutiest lead singer. Certainly, there are common ordinary aspects of wizard school life that could be discussed with muggle friends. I think part of the appeal to the reader as to what happens at Hogwarts is that it is so universally common and familiar. She could talk about her friends (like Ginny), and who's dating who, who likes who, and who doesn't like who. who's hot-who's not. I do agree, to some extent, with someone else's suggestion that the easiest way for Hogwarts and the wizard world to deal with the problem is to create a fake muggle front school. I'm not sure if Standardized test are truly required, or if schools simply have to establish that kids have an acceptable level of literacy. I suspect O-Levels and A-Levels are controlled by an independant testing authority who administers the test, but what about earlier basic skills test? Are they administered by the school, or does an independant test authority come to the school to administer them? USA doesn't have government mandated standardized testing, but when I was in school we did have basic skills test; specifically the Iowa Basic Skills Test (even though I was in Minnesota). An independant organization collected, score, cataloged, correlated, and documented the results of the test, but the test themselves were given/supervised by teachers in our local school. As a side note, in the areas of the USA where states do have standardized testing, while the students are tested, it's actually the school that is being graded. The tests are to make sure that the schools are meeting a minimum standard of education. So, in the USA these standardized tests aren't part of a students 'qualifications'. I wonder if anyone here who has been a member of the school systems in England or Scotland as a teacher or administrator could comment on this? Are the government mandated standardized tests absolutely required, or can independant schools create their own standards and documentation of skills? Can private independant schools choose to opt-out of standardized testing? Logically most hiring businesses would want to see the standardized tests, but does law absolutely require students to take them? Could a student skip O-Level and A-Level tests altogether and attempt to make there way in the world based on obvious intelligence and literacy combined with demonstrated skills? Would the fact that the school is in Scotland have a bearing on this issue? I'm curious because knowing this would help me invent the best possible means by which Hogwarts could overcome the problem under discussion. Just trying to figure it out. Steve/bboyminn From celletiger at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 06:36:55 2005 From: celletiger at yahoo.com (Marcelle) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:36:55 -0000 Subject: Ruminations on "THE" Veil and its effects... was: body... veil... where??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127827 lots of SNIPPAGE > Chys: >Maybe that's part of the mystery of the veil, and why it's located in the DOM so they can study it? celle here: Although I think classical liturature would refute the idea, still, I'd like to know IF there's more than one veil into the (insert your idea of what is beyond). QUESTIONS: Considering "the veil" as a reoccurring notion throughout (western?) literature, is there only the one, "the" veil? ***And in JKR's world, does the MOM now possess the only veil?*** Are there other "veils" around planet earth in the WW? Did the WW confiscate Hades' door and physically take it into their basement laboratory? Are there several entrances into the world beyond the veil - perhaps some that do *not* have an actual stone dais and curtain - maybe just a straw covered pit with faint tiger growls, or a crack in the ice over a frozen lake... If there is another way to go beyond the veil, perhaps there is another way out... Requesting answers from the HPfGU experts out there, celle who is fine with the finality of SB's death and would be intruiged by HP's visit to the underworld, but seriously doubts that will happen because that story has already been written and it would take away from the seriousness of "the second war", which doesnt seem so scary yet...bella is more frightful than LV to me... From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Apr 20 06:38:32 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:38:32 -0000 Subject: ... muggle-borns... off the radar? St. Brutus Academy of Naughty Boys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127828 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: : > > I always thought that St. Brutus was invented for the sole benefit > of Marge who, judging by her firm belief in existing of corporeal > punishment in schools, seems to live in a time-wrap. I don't think > that his neighbours would buy the story much less that he would > attempt to sell it. Geoff: I would agree with you completely. As Steve pointed out, Harry was supposed to go Stonewall High. St.Brutus' is a cover story for Marge - and possibly for anyone who troubled to ask Vernon. Considering the sort of area the Dursleys live in, I think that would be unlikely; Vernon would probably be steering conversation with the neighbours in the direciton of the weather and the lack of rain for the gardens or the state of the Footsie (FTSE = equivalent of the Dow Jones) or whether John Major was making a better job of things than Maggie Thatcher (bearing in mind this was in thee arly 1990s). From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 07:22:05 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:22:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050420072205.16382.qmail@web53907.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127829 Shunra I've often wondered about a related question - how do the Muggle families themselves go about explaining their children's whereabouts to friends and family? Harry is an orphan whose aunt and uncle manage to cover up his presence at Hogwarts, not least because they make sure Harry has zero social life while at Privet Drive. But what about, say, Hermione's dentist parents? Don't her proud grandparents want to know if there's going to be another professional in the family? Don't her old school friends want to keep in touch? What do they tell their friends when the subject turns to their children's schooling? Maybe the Muggle school records can be "magicked", but explaining where your child disappears to for ten straight months must be pretty difficult. Lynn: It's not difficult at all. All the parents have to say is that the kids are away at boarding school which is very common in England, particularly in certain segments of society. For example, the military where families move quite a bit or professionals who tend to work a lot. If the kids want to correspond with old friends, all they have to do is send the letter to their parents who can then post it for them. As for grandparents, I guess it would depend on whether the parents have told them the truth. The parents would need to say is that their kids are going to a small boarding school for (fill in description) which is be invitation only based on test scores, not necessarily the name of the school. There may be those who ask and I'm sure the parents have a name already made up for that purpose. The harder part would be the school holidays though they can go home for Christmas and the summer. I suppose, however, that the parents can say either that they are staying with school friends or staying at school for revision for upcoming exams. I see no problem with Hermione blowing her cover while she's home. I wonder how the Creevey brothers keep quiet. LOL Lynn --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 07:40:35 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 07:40:35 -0000 Subject: Ruminations on "THE" Veil - a Speculative History In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127830 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marcelle" wrote: > > lots of SNIPPAGE > > > Chys: > >Maybe that's part of the mystery of the veil, and why it's located > in the DOM so they can study it? > celle here: > > Although I think classical liturature would refute the idea, still, > I'd like to know IF there's more than one veil into the (insert your > idea of what is beyond). > > QUESTIONS: > ... is there only the one, "the" veil? ***And in JKR's > world, does the MOM now possess the only veil?*** Are there > other "veils" around planet earth in the WW? Did the WW confiscate > Hades' door and physically take it into their basement laboratory? > ...edited... > > If there is another way to go beyond the veil, perhaps there is > another way out... > > Requesting answers from the HPfGU experts out there, > celle bboyminn: I also find The Veil fascinating, so fascinating in fact that I have invented a history for it. This is from my post in the Leaky Lounge forums, and I may or may not have posted it here before. None the less... I picture the archway as very old, weathered and worn, and much like a grand stone arch over the doorway into a mansion, castle, or catherderal. Here is my speculative backstory on the arch and veil. In the beginning of time, when powerful natural forces were forging the universe, a great psychic rip in the space time continuum occurred on earth. In the beginning of earth time, this wasn't signficant, but as humans came to dominate the earthscape, and wandered across it's face exploring, they soon discovered this psychic breach between the realm of the living and the dead. At first, it was considered a dangerous taboo place, as man's intellect developed and further developed a spiritual sense, it became a holy place. Soon a stone arch shrine was erected around the life/death breach. The arch was then covered with a veil to protect people from the temptations and horrors that lie beyond the veil. Exploring European wizards eventually discovered the ancient Veiled Archway, and in time found a magical way to bind the breach to the Arch itself. That allowed them to transport the Arch to a new location. Of course, currently it resides in the United Kingdom's Dept of Mysteries/Death Chamber. That explains how the Archway and Veil ended up where they currently are. Since I believe that the the Archway, Veil, and the phenomenon which they enclose are a naturally occuring phenomenon, it seems reasonable that while extremely rare, there could be more. Although, whether they are on earth or in the far reaches of the Universe is another matter to contemplate. In the beginning of time when great cataclysmic forces shaped the universe, one or more of the breaches between the spiritual dimension and the physical dimension occurred. At some point, the breach was discovered, and you can take the story from there. The alternate theory would be that in the dark and ancient past, the darkest of dark wizards using the darkest of dark magic created this breach between the world of the living and dead. Perhaps, similar to Voldemort, he thought the dead knew the secret to eternal life, or he sought to obtain dark and dangerous knowledge from a long dead but very great and powerful wizard, or perhaps, he sought to summon a great army of demons from the underworld. Regardless of his exact motivation, I highly suspect the outcome was not good; you know the old saying, 'It's not nice to fool with mother nature'. All the above is relatively new, but what appears below is old old old news, as I've said it so many times before, but as long as I'm on the subject... I have to believe something as bold and significant as the Veiled Archway has to have some larger role in the greater story. Many of us in discussion have speculated that in someway perhaps Harry will make a short trip beyond the veil to perform some act or learn some secret that will help him fulfill his hero's journey. Perhaps, in the final battle Harry will drag Voldemort through the Veil where he will be dragged down to the depths of hell. Whereas Harry will meet his parents and Sirius who will tell him that it is not his time, and that he must return to the land of the living, which, though reluctant, Harry will do. This would tie in the many modern day references associating near-death experiences and the expression 'beyond the veil". Just making it up as I go a long. Steve/bboyminn From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 08:18:14 2005 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (Andromeda) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:18:14 -0000 Subject: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127831 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Fitzov de Sullens > wrote: > > > Fitzov: > > > > Am I the only person on this site who would be tremendously > disappointed if Sirius DOESN'T reappear in Book 6, very much alive? > I > fail to understand why this would be some great cop out on the part > of > JKR, who has given us plenty of clues that Sirius didn't 'die' a > normal death. > > GEO: Except Rowling has constantly said that there are limitations > to magic in the Harry Potter Universe and one of those limitations > that she specifically imposed was that people couldn't be > resurrected from the dead by the use of magic. > > Plus considering how she was saying that there was a major death in > OOTP, I would consider it cheating on her part if she reversed the > death or rewrote it so that Sirius didn't actually die. > > > After all, if both Harry and Voldemort hadn't cheated death, > there > > would be no story! > > GEO: Harry and Voldemort didn't exactly cheat death. The two of them > had powerful magical protections that made it impossible for > Voldemort to actually die and for Harry to be immune from > Voldemort's killing curse. It's a different story all together if > you have someone that actually died coming back from the dead. Andromeda now: I'll agree with you (Fitzov) that Sirius' return wouldn't necessarily be a cop-out. After all, we didn't see him die, we only saw him disappear. There was no killing curse, no body. Just a quick sail through the veil... where did his body go? I don't expect him to come back, but wouldn't be disappointed if he did! But JKR did say that there was a "reason" for Sirius' death, so it may all be hopeless. From miamibarb at BellSouth.net Wed Apr 20 10:41:59 2005 From: miamibarb at BellSouth.net (Barb Roberts) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:41:59 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <96762efc98a38dca65da264b4a91ea31@bellsouth.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127832 On Apr 20, 2005, at 2:35 AM, Steve wrote: > > bboyminn: > > I suspect Hermione's parents simply say that there daughter is going > to a very small, very exclusive, very private, and very specialized > school in Northern Scotland. What the school is called creates another > problem... > > As a side note, in the areas of the USA where states do have > standardized testing, while the students are tested, it's actually the > school that is being graded. The tests are to make sure that the > schools are meeting a minimum standard of education. So, in the USA > these standardized tests aren't part of a students 'qualifications'. I love the Dursley's answer to the problem of the name of Harry's school-- "St. Brutus's Secure Center for Incurably Criminal Boys." On a side note in Florida, there is a test that one needs to pass to get a high school degree from a public school. If a student fails, they get a certificate rather than a full degree. I think it's politically possible only because even after failing the test there are other ways to get into college, such as passing the GED (another test) and going to a community college. Barbara Roberts [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 11:08:08 2005 From: jmgarciaiii at yahoo.com (jmgarciaiii) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 11:08:08 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127833 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > > Right here goes, I think I might be unpopular after this and I > accept that I have little right to criticise as I am a student > and not an author but... I thought that Sirius's death was lame. > > -Pause while you gasp with shock- > > I mean he was Harry's mentor/surrogate father/best friend and a key > character (I thought) for the future books and instead of dying > bravely in battle he falls through a doorway! > > I can hypothesise that JK may have been trying to demonstrate the > frailty of life or how the dead are still close to us. But I feel > that it could have been expressed in a more dramatic and fitting > way. > > I mean, what's next? Harry dying due to a heavy sneeze? Neville > being killed by a cactus? Dumbledore swallowing a fatal Arsenic > flavour Every Flavour Bean? If we assume JKR chooses here words very carefully and she writes with extreme precision then, therefore, we can safely state SB died by going through the veil--as opposed to getting zapped by an AK curse--FOR A REASON. (I'm not arguing whether it's a good or bad reason, mind you) My hypothesis remains this is because (and canon is literally SCROFULOUS with clues pointing to this) Harry will end up going to the Underworld after Sirius. This wouldn't be possible if Sirius had died of consumption, pleuresy or bubonic plague. Just my 2 knuts, -Joe in SoFla From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 12:28:07 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 12:28:07 -0000 Subject: ... muggle-borns... off the radar? St. Brutus Academy of Naughty Boys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127834 a_svirn wrote: > > I always thought that St. Brutus was invented for the sole benefit > > of Marge who, judging by her firm belief in existing of corporeal > > punishment in schools, seems to live in a time-wrap. I don't think > > that his neighbours would buy the story much less that he would > > attempt to sell it. > > Geoff: > I would agree with you completely. As Steve pointed out, Harry was > supposed to go Stonewall High. > > St.Brutus' is a cover story for Marge - and possibly for anyone who > troubled to ask Vernon. Considering the sort of area the Dursleys > live in, I think that would be unlikely; Vernon would probably be > steering conversation with the neighbours in the direciton of the > weather and the lack of rain for the gardens or the state of the > Footsie (FTSE = equivalent of the Dow Jones) or whether John Major > was making a better job of things than Maggie Thatcher (bearing in > mind this was in thee arly 1990s). Ginger now: I agree that Vernon wouldn't encourage conversation about Harry or his school and would most likely divert the conversation. One point from OoP struck me. Ch. 1 US page 11: Neighbourhood children all around were terrified of him (Dudley)- even more terrified than they were of "that Potter boy", who, they had been warned, was a hardened hooligan who attended St. Brutus's Secure Centre for Incurably Criminal Boys. So not only did the story get around, it worked for both Vernon and Harry's benefit. No worries about what to say when people ask about your coursework or anything related to school at all. They just make themselves scarce. Better than a Muggle repelling charm. Ginger, who thinks the Hardened Hooligans would be a great name for a band. From bree4378 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 00:44:48 2005 From: bree4378 at yahoo.com (Sabrina) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 00:44:48 -0000 Subject: HBP Disappointments Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127835 lupinore asked: what would disappoint you about HBP? (book 6) Here is my list of what would dissapoint me. 1. If Sirius remained dead. I want him back! Even as a ghost. 2. If Lupin does not make a comeback. 3. If anyone in the Trio, or Hagrid died. 4. If both Petunia's secrets(how she knew about dementors) or Snape's secrets (his real gripe with James) are not revealed. 5. If Draco became a good guy. 6. If Grawp continued to have no significance to the plot. I do think it would be great if he did something substantial, like getting the Giants to join Dumbledore's side and the fight against Voldemort. 7. If Ron doesn't get his moment to shine and show what he can do. 8. If Hermione lost her edge, and quit bossing the boys around. Thats what make her who she is. 9. If Neville's skills did not improve. 10. If we didn't find out what is behind the veil at the DoM. 11. If no international wizards or witches make a come back. (Viktor, Karkaroff, Fleur, Maxime, or new international characters) 12. If Ron and Hermione fail to realize their feelings for each other. 13. If Quidditch or Dumbledore's Army went away. 14. If Luna Lovegood or Tonks are ignored. 15. If Firenze keeps teaching DADA. Its too weird. From mfterman at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 06:01:22 2005 From: mfterman at yahoo.com (mfterman) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 06:01:22 -0000 Subject: SHIP: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127836 Hermione is very supportive of Harry, it is true, but strictly in an intellectual fashion. In the vast majority of meetings between Harry and Hermione in OotP, Harry comes away from Hermione feeling more aggravated and annoyed than before. Harry's feelings for her are so deep that he's actually happy he makes her miserable at the start of the book, and he's lying to her and trying to avoid her later on in the book. Hermione has terrible people skills. Her technique for trying to deal with Harry is to nag him. In many ways she's her own worst enemy. Yes, she tried to give Harry good advice on many occasions, but her delivery is terrible and in many cases tended to backfire on her. She insults his godfather, insults Quidditch, etc. Yes, the voice of his conscience becomes Hermione's voice, but all it's managing to do is to give him guilty feelings. That's hardly a positive romantic reaction. OotP has the friendship of Harry and Hermione reach its lowest point since PoA. Ginny doesn't give Harry a fraction of the intellectual help that Hermione does, but her meetings with Harry tend to be characterized by giving him more emotional support. While everyone talks about Hermione's role in the meeting at Grimmauld place, it should be noted at the beginning of the conversation, Hermione is driving Harry up the wall with his comments. Harry doesn't calm down until he talks to Ginny, and it is explicitly referenced in the book that his heart lightened up after talking to her, before Hermione tried to join in with supporting arguments. Then there's the easter egg scene in the library. Harry talks to Ginny and confides in her about something that he doesn't talk to Hermione or Ron about. Ginny doesn't actually give Harry that much practical assistance other than saying she'll talk to the twins. However the key point is that she managed to cut through Harry's depression and give him hope. Once he got past his depression he worked out his own solution to his own problems. Ginny does the best job of all of Harry's aquaintances in coping with his anger. She doesn't back down, she doesn't lose her temper or grow tearful, she stands her ground and gives as good as she gets. She tries to cheer him up with his being on the Quidditch team the following year, and he's starting to confide in her things that he doesn't confide to Ron or Hermione. Hermione is a great sidekick for Harry, or at least she will be once she learns how to give him advice without causing him to explode, but she doesn't demonstrate the traits that Harry wants or needs in a girlfriend. Ginny has done the best job there, with Luna coming in second. mfterman From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Wed Apr 20 08:29:08 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 08:29:08 -0000 Subject: Muggling wizards and wizarding muggles Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127837 The many posters (in various threads) considering the possibility of transferring training between the WW and MW are overlooking a crucial and canonical issue ? marriage. Seamus's mother must have what looks like a muggle life if his dad only discovers that she's a witch when she tells him she is, after their marriage. Same with the backstory of Dean Thomas's wizard dad ? his mother presumably doesn't know to this day that Dean is half-wizard. (And no, I don't think he's the HBP. I don't think the HBP is necessarily a person at all. It would give me great pleasure if it was a pub, preferably with Aberforth D polishing the glasses!) To digress slightly: Dean's father always makes me think of the West Indian Old One in the Susan Cooper series ? The Dark Is Rising. (A great but flawed idea IMO. Would be interesting to know if JKR has read them.) And like the Old Ones, there Mr Thomas was, an undercover agent like someone in Deighton or Le Carre, living the life of any West Ham fan. Almost! Makes you wonder how many others there might be out there ... Then there's Molly W's (or is it Arthur's?) second cousin, the accountant ? the one they don't talk about or see! There's one in every family, of course, though usually not because of being an accountant. Is he a squib? Did he cross over, perhaps for love of a muggle? Or are there other possibilities ? perhaps he just enjoys his career or can't stand his relations? As for Hermione meeting her old friends in the holidays ? however hard I try, I can't imagine her not being able to bore the life out of them with a few well chosen raves about Chemistry, Maths and History classes (which she could base rather loosely on Potions, Arithmancy and Wizarding History). In school holidays, kids don't talk about school. They put school firmly out of their hearts and minds until the very last moment. And those there (putative) doting grandparents and nosey neighbours would of course ask about school, but could also be easily sidetracked. We've all done it and had it done to us; as a school friend of mine once remarked, mothers are the necessity of invention! Deborah, not necessarily inventing. From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 20 07:20:32 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 07:20:32 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127838 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mfterman" wrote: > > No, there's a much simpler way: register Hogwarts with the Muggle authorities as a British public school (that is, it's independently financed, not open to the general public, etc.). Harry and Hermione have Muggle school transcripts which are probably based on their actual grades translated somehow. > > Muggle-borns thus never drop off the radar, or even Half-bloods who attended a Muggle primary school. They simple in the records transfer to an obscure public school in Scotland and that takes care of that. Makes life easier for the parents as well. That's a good idea, but in order to be registered the school would need an actual address - and I'm having trouble figuring out what is accessible to muggles, and what exists through hidden doorways. For example, even though the Hogwarts Express leaves a magical hidden platform, Harry and Ron could chase it in their car. They didn't go through any magic gateway... did they? Sandra (getting confused) From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 13:35:10 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:35:10 -0000 Subject: Book 4 predictions (really long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127839 You know, this new Yahoo style has had some bad feng-shui or something. So, for your amusement, I dug waaaaaaaaaay back to the olden days before book 4 came out and gathered some predictions. The only names I recognize are Neil (Flying Ford Anglia), voicelady, and JoAnna, who hasn't posted much since becoming a new Mommy, which is understandable:o) If any others are still around, perhaps under different names, please feel free to come forward and take a bow. Note: all message numbers are from YahooClub, not the current Group. About Quidditch: In message 484, Skimmel_98 wrote: As for Harry becoming the captain of the team. We know that Oliver was the captain of the Griffindor team his fifth, sixth and seventh year at Hogwarts (Books 1, 2 & 3). Since Harry was the first first year to play in many years, its safe to say Oliver didn't start until his second year. So Oliver was Captain of the team in his fourth year on the team. The next season will be Harry's fourth year on the team (Book 4). It fits together and Harry does love Quidditch. Somehow I don't think it will be though. Oliver spent a lot of time working out new plans and training schedules and what not. I think Harry will save his time for other things like fighting off he who must not be named. Perhaps one of the Weasley twins. In message 487, norevoli replied: I think I agree with Skimmel, although Harry does show a great fondness for the sport, i'm not exactly sure if he'll be captain, what with the adventures he always seems to be in the middle of. I think I'd agree that the Weasley's would be more likely to become Captains although I wonder how responsible they are. But I actually wish that one of the girls becomes captain. Perhaps Angelina Johnson (who Lee seems to be fond of!) or maybe Alicia Spinnet! It would be nice to see a girl at the head of the team. Oh.. Have any of you thought about who'll be replacing Oliver Wood as Keeper? I was sort of hoping it would be Ron, ( I sort of feel bad about his being overshadowed by his brothers.) In message 497, voicelady said: Without any doubt, the next captain will most likely be Harry himself! And as for missing Oliver, I wouldn't be surprised if he and all of the other characters we've grown fond of show up in later books. Or at least the final book where they will ALL band together to defeat you-know-who! Wouldn't that be fun... In 496, norevoli prophesied: Well JK Rowling never really does comment on whether or not Ron is really bad at Quidditch so maybe we will see him on the team.I hope! I hope! I was kind of wishing that he semi gets his desire that was shown in the Mirror of Erised, about winning the Quidditch cup and all. Do you think he's a good build for a Keeper, being gangling and tall and all? About Hagrid: In 2244, JoAnna wondered: I had a thought about Hagrid today... Wouldn't it be an interesting plot turn in book 4 if Hagrid was re-admitted to Hogwarts? He was expelled in his third year for opening the Chamber of Secrets. However, in book 2, it's proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that Hagrid did NOT open the CoS and therefore did not deserve to be expelled. He was made a teacher in PoA, but shouldn't he be able to become a fully qualified wizard, as he would have if not for Tom Riddle? (Of course, there's a chance he would have been expelled later in his Hogwarts career for taking care of other "interesting creatures.") If Hagrid was re-admitted to Hogwarts, he'd be in Harry's class (a fourth-year)! Wouldn't that make for some interesting chapters? Of course, maybe it's not possible for him to be re-admitted, if it's a hard and fast rule that only children can be Hogwarts students....but it would be interesting! In 3426, Neil mused: I find the idea of Hagrid 'fancying' Professor McGonagall highly amusing. "It's like this, see. Erm, I FANCIES yer, Professor McGonagall an' I always 'as, if the truth be known!" blurted Hagrid, suddenly, shuffling from foot to foot and pulling at his beard. "Oh Hagrid!" shrilled Professor McGonagall, as a blush came to her cheeks. "Your words of flattery fill me with girlish glee. Oh, oh... FIFTY points to all Houses and treacle pudding all round!!" McGonagall walked to the door, closing it firmly, before shedding her glasses, loosening her tight bun of hair, and turning to face her secret admirer. Don't even go there! Other interesting rumours: In 3311, davehoz asserted: Besides, all the latest Book 4 rumors says that the victim will be a *teacher*. In 181, JanisaA quoted: Most sites have two deaths listed- and the source of the names is said to be reliable- so if you don't want to know, look away now: Crabbe and George Weasley In 2903, davehoz pondered: There's a strange rumor that's been posted on Jenna's site. It says that in Book 4 Harry will be EXPELLED FROM HOGWARTS!!! This seems to terrible to conceive, but at the same time it might explain why the Book is rumored to be so long, if he has to take Year 4 twice! Of course this would mean than Ron and Hermione would be a year ahead of him unless they get kicked out too! Thoughts anyone? In 3167, davehoz speculated: Hmmm... "The Riddle House". As in Tom? Since each book starts at Privet drive, does this mean that Number 4 was once the residence of You-Know-Who??? So there you have it. Some came true, some not. Some are still open. I didn't copy all of them, but there were the usual death suspects, who were the same as we discussed before the release of OoP, and are still being considered today. That's all from here. Hope you enjoyed it. Ginger, who loves wandering around the archives. From garybec101 at comcast.net Wed Apr 20 14:01:06 2005 From: garybec101 at comcast.net (garybec101 at comcast.net) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:01:06 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bonehead Question about Goblet of Fire Message-ID: <042020051401.1053.426660A2000735080000041D2200762194CECFCE0C0A0D979D0E09@comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127840 -------------- Original message -------------- --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, theotokos wrote: Theotokos: But, to reiterate what has been said, "Junior" is never used in this context in the UK. Becki's opinion; Not that it is really that relivent but Barty Jr. may very well not be a Jr. If he has a different middle name than his father, then Jr. would not apply. I do believe though that the truth is if Jr and Sr are not really a part of British volcabulary, then it wouldn't be in the book. Becki (who finally gets to post something after finally getting through hundreds of posts and always being weeks behind :) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From azakitpgr at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 20 13:55:13 2005 From: azakitpgr at yahoo.co.uk (Paul) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 13:55:13 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127841 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > > If my sister took her kids out of school, she'd have to inform > certain authorities This is only true in England if the child is on a school register ? rather than between schools. The authority in this case would be the school; a deregistration letter is used. >, and demonstrate that they are receiving an education The LEA may make informal enquiries about provision but have no further duty unless they have reason to suspect an education is not taking place. > They would have to have exams and reach formal levels to show that > everything is going well. This is not required, but the law says that: The parent of every child of compulsory school age shall cause him to receive efficient full-time education suitable (a) to his age, ability and aptitude, and (b) to any special educational needs he may have, either by regular attendance at school or otherwise. > So when, for example, the Potters and the Grangers send their > Harry and Hermione off to Hogwarts, what do they tell the local > authorities? If they have not registered at a state school they are under no obligation to tell anybody anything. >Suddenly the kids aren't at school anywhere, and there's no record any longer of either of them getting an education. This is fine. In England you have to apply for your child to go on the register of the school to which you are applying. A child that has completed Primary school but has not been placed on the register of a new school does disappear from the system. This is not a fault of LEAs just a function of the way the law is written. Further info on this area of the law in England & Wales may be found at: http://www.education-otherwise.org/Legal/SummLawEng&Wls.htm So if the Dursleys had registered Harry for Stonewall then there is explaining to do. If they never got around to registering him then it simply is not an issue. Paul Home educating 3 daughters From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Apr 20 14:43:45 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:43:45 -0000 Subject: Remus Lupin boring? and Dorothy Sayers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127842 Alla: I used to like Sirius SO much more than Remus, because indeed I considered him a to be a boring character. I still like Sirius very much, but Remus is grown on me significantly in the "excitement department". His "excitement" is more subtle than Sirius', but it is there , IMO. Actually that will be a perfect excuse for me to dig up another one of Elkins' posts, where she is wondering what parts of Remus personality could make James and Sirius suspect him as spy. J I suspect that Pippin got at least some of her inspiration for ESE! Lupin from that post. Apologies to Pippin if I am wrong. Elkins does not go that far though. Pippin: No apologies required. One could hardly fail to be inspired by Elkins. However, while Elkins and I came to share a similarly jaundiced view of Lupin's virtues, the ESE!Lupin theory is based on opportunity not motive. Indeed motive is the weakest part of it -- there is nothing in Lupin's character, weak though it is, to suggest he would view the acts I've accused him of with anything but abhorrence. If it is not all a charade, as I first thought, then one would expect ESE!Lupin to be deeply troubled by what he has done. Trouble is, abhorrence never seems to have stopped Lupin from doing things he knew were wrong: allowing James and Sirius to have their way with Snape, endangering the lives of innocent villagers, and withholding information about Sirius and the Map from Dumbledore. We are likely to remain in the dark about ESE!Lupin's motives for joining Voldemort until the final revelation, though I think we got a broad hint in OOP. Is it really so hard to understand how Lupin could turn away from DD? Dumbledore, some listies complain, is not particular enough about who his allies are. Some would rather see Harry get even with Umbridge and Snape than with Voldemort, whose fearsome image in the WW seems to them vastly exaggerated...is it conceivable that this is how young Lupin might have felt? And there's no backing away from the Death Eaters once you find out their reputation for murder isn't an exaggeration after all... But you have to drop the idea that only a sadistic creep can be a murderer and consider that murder might be done by a decent enough person with something to hide. That may be where the work of Dorothy Sayers comes in. (I recommend The Nine Tailors as a starting point. A locale almost as spooky as Hogwarts, and a death by no human hand.) Pippin From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 15:16:02 2005 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:16:02 -0000 Subject: Remus Lupin boring? and Dorothy Sayers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127843 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote:> > Pippin: > the > ESE!Lupin theory is based on opportunity not motive. > Indeed motive is the weakest part of it -- there is > nothing in Lupin's character, weak though it is, to > suggest he would view the acts I've accused him of with > anything but abhorrence. If it is not all a charade, as > I first thought, then one would expect ESE!Lupin to be > deeply troubled by what he has done.> > Trouble is, abhorrence never seems to have stopped Lupin > from doing things he knew were wrong: allowing James and > Sirius to have their way with Snape, endangering the > lives of innocent villagers, and withholding information > about Sirius and the Map from Dumbledore. TigerPatronus: I'm a big proponant of your ESE!Lupin theory. It does seem to horribly fit. In the PoA movie (and I realize that movies are theoretically OT but I'm discussing the books, too) Lupin had that whole scene w Harry on the bridge where he was talking about Lily. I assume that was to assauge our wounded hearts for leaving out all the Mauraders stuff. Supposedly, that scene was run by JKR for accuracy, etc. Does that scene fit into the ESE!Lupin theory? Is it more remorse? A good reason why he *shouldn't* have betrayed them but did so anyway? Pippin: > But you have to drop the idea that only a sadistic creep > can be a murderer and consider that murder might be > done by a decent enough person with something to hide. > That may be where the work of Dorothy Sayers comes in. > (I recommend The Nine Tailors as a starting point. A locale > almost as spooky as Hogwarts, and a death by no human hand.) > Pippin Thanks for the recommendation! TK - TigerPatronus From katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk Tue Apr 19 18:56:16 2005 From: katrinabarnard at yahoo.co.uk (Katrina) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 18:56:16 -0000 Subject: Sirius' death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127844 Further to other peoples comments I dont think that Sirus will come back as it would undermine JKs whole writing style. But I do agree that we haven't seen the last of the veil. Maybe Voldemort could be pulled in by the spirits of the people he's killed. Kind of a moral gravity field. Just a thought, -Katrina From heatherfrandsen at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 15:16:48 2005 From: heatherfrandsen at yahoo.com (heatherfrandsen) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:16:48 -0000 Subject: Presents Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127845 I have been noticing that Ron and Hermione both give Harry presents at Christmas and on this Birthday, yet we never hear of Harry getting either of them anything. Any ideas on that? -Heather From moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 16:37:31 2005 From: moonmyyst13 at yahoo.com (K G) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:37:31 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Presents In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050420163731.68140.qmail@web53505.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127846 heatherfrandsen wrote: I have been noticing that Ron and Hermione both give Harry presents at Christmas and on this Birthday, yet we never hear of Harry getting either of them anything. Any ideas on that? -Heather I do not have my books in front of me right now - well, they are on the other side of the room and I have been working in the yard and garden for the last 5 hours - but there are places that you see Harry giving christmas gifts. Didn't he give Hermione a book about runes at one point and Ron got something about quiddich? What I want to know is when do they shop for the gifts? I know of one place where they go to hogsmeade and hermione talks about the tooth flossing candy for her parents but before they went to hogsmead, etc? I am guessing that they order some by mail order but you never hear about it. moonmyyst --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kempermentor at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 17:01:45 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:01:45 -0000 Subject: Ruminations on "THE" Veil - a Speculative History In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127847 > bboyminn: ...what appears below is old old old news, as I've said it so many times before, but as long as I'm on the subject... > > I have to believe something as bold and significant as the Veiled Archway has to have some larger role in the greater story. Many of us in discussion have speculated that in someway perhaps Harry will make a short trip beyond the veil to perform some act or learn some secret that will help him fulfill his hero's journey. > > Perhaps, in the final battle Harry will drag Voldemort through the Veil where he will be dragged down to the depths of hell. Whereas Harry will meet his parents and Sirius who will tell him that it is not his time, and that he must return to the land of the living, which, though reluctant, Harry will do. This would tie in the many modern day references associating near-death experiences and the expression 'beyond the veil". Kemper now: Arch and Veil do seem significant, but here's my what if. Harry and Voldemort are dueling near the Arch. Harry starts to hear the whispers though he can't make out what the say. Voldemort, who has much more hands on experience with death both from watching and from killing, hears the voices as well. But the voices he hears are much more clear, and because he has so much more death experience, the voices now have some form. Form of shadow, but some forms in body. While dueling, near the Arch, arms of shadow and arms of body reach out from just beyond the Veil, snatching Voldemort in an anti- disapparating grip of death, draggin him back beyond the Veil. But, as he's dragged to the otherside, will he be a: terrified and numb b: terrified and screaming c: terrified and crying d: other Steve, you heard it here first. Kemper From pegruppel at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 17:15:40 2005 From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:15:40 -0000 Subject: Ruminations on "THE" Veil - a Speculative History In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127848 -- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" wrote: > > Arch and Veil do seem significant, but here's my what if. > > Harry and Voldemort are dueling near the Arch. Harry starts to hear > the whispers though he can't make out what the say. Voldemort, who > has much more hands on experience with death both from watching and > from killing, hears the voices as well. But the voices he hears are > much more clear, and because he has so much more death experience, > the voices now have some form. Form of shadow, but some forms in > body. While dueling, near the Arch, arms of shadow and arms of body > reach out from just beyond the Veil, snatching Voldemort in an anti- > disapparating grip of death, draggin him back beyond the Veil. > > But, as he's dragged to the otherside, will he be > a: terrified and numb > b: terrified and screaming > c: terrified and crying > d: other > > Steve, you heard it here first. > > Kemper Peg now: Steve, Kemper I like both your posts. Kemper, I especially like the image of Lord Thingy being "death-napped," a terrifying image if there ever was one! As for how he'd go, I'd take d) Other. I'd expect him to go terrified and roaring mad (NO, NO! Don't you know who I am!?!). Fear and anger are close relatives, and LV isn't about to break down and start screaming and crying at the very end. Peg From porcupine88 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 17:51:37 2005 From: porcupine88 at yahoo.com (brandy) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 17:51:37 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127849 > USA doesn't have government mandated standardized testing, but when I > was in school we did have basic skills test; specifically the Iowa > Basic Skills Test (even though I was in Minnesota). An independant > organization collected, score, cataloged, correlated, and documented > the results of the test, but the test themselves were given/supervised > by teachers in our local school. > > As a side note, in the areas of the USA where states do have > standardized testing, while the students are tested, it's actually the > school that is being graded. The tests are to make sure that the > schools are meeting a minimum standard of education. So, in the USA > these standardized tests aren't part of a students 'qualifications'. Well, with No Child Left Behind there actually is government-mandated standardized testing - but only in public schools. Private schools and homeschoolers don't have to do it. So a wizarding school in the US wouldn't have any problems with it even if they had a muggle "front" school. I always assumed this sort of thing (the child disappearing) was partially dealt with through memory charms. If a muggle neighbor or friend accidentally finds out too much about where a wizard child goes to school, *poof* they don't know it anymore. I mean, eventually the wizard kids have to basically disengage completely from muggle society, don't they? So maybe it's best if their muggle friends just forget they exist, they make new wizard friends, and their only connection to muggles is their family. -Brandy From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Apr 20 18:09:48 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:09:48 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: <1297128873.20050419214301@vcem.com> References: <1099589038.20050419160057@vcem.com> <1297128873.20050419214301@vcem.com> Message-ID: <6570713adff5c1b08c15af8e17c067b7@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 127850 Susanne: > I'd go along with your interpretation had Harry shown *any* > hint of having come to these conclusions after the trial. I think he has shown many hints of doing just that (I honestly can't think of any other way to interpret the way he noticed the falsity of the DoM statue, for instance), although I don't think it's within his narrative role or his character to suddenly become a crusader for non-wizarding rights. As with what happened in Dobby's case, Harry very much has a "saving people thing" when he can directly see someone's suffering and is in any position to effect immediate, demonstratable, positive change in that person's life. That is what he is passionate about, whereas Hermione, by constrast, will always be looking at the big picture and trying to make change on a more general level. > But he still gets annoyed with Spew, he still avoids > supporting Hermione with it, and I haven't seen any signs > that Harry now feels differently about the issue. I guess I wouldn't normally think of Harry as ever being actively *annoyed* by SPEW (not the way Ron is), although I would certainly agree that he ignores and avoids Hermione's brand of "elf liberation" if he can, because it's not in his character to tell her that she's doing it wrong (mostly because he's probably never given the right way much thought himself). Actually, I think Harry has always had his head in sort of the right place when it comes to elf rights, even though he doesn't have Hermione's desire or drive to *do* something about them. See, I've always felt that both Harry *and* JKR agree with the principles behind SPEW, but disapprove of Hermione's methods and attitude (rightly so, IMO). In the real world, the ideal thing for Harry to do would take a personal interest in improving matters and explain to Hermione how her actions are *hurting* her cause. In the fictional Potterverse, however, there are a number of narrative reasons why this SHOULDN'T happen. First of all, it's *Hermione's* narrative function to symbolize the maturation of a social conscience amongst the Trio (and, by extension, their generation), not Harry's. Thus, while it is necessary for her to make mistakes, it is also necessary for the resolution of the mistakes and the final conclusion on the matter to come FROM her. Letting Harry suddenly have all the answers would be undercutting Hermione's journey toward developing a responsible, well-informed social conscience, IMO. > I agree that JKR wanted to point out these WW social > issues to us the readers (the before/after the trail contrast is quite > clear), but I saw Harry grinning at the > thought of Hermione's reaction to the statue of the house > elf. Nothing about thinkly fondly of her, or realizing how right > she was, but more thinking how she would be going off on one > of her spew-inspired rants. I actually think it was a "fond" sort of grin, although it probably did have something to do about her going off on SPEW. Here's an analogy: Harry sees an article about something Quidditch related (perhaps about the Chudley Cannons or Vicktor Krum, pre-GoF), and smiles to think of Ron's humorously enthusiastic response to it. I don't think this is an instance of Harry *mocking* or disrespecting Ron's interests in any way, he has merely seen something that reminds him of his friend and his smiling at the imagined response. > Harry, and a few (or hopefully many others) will probably > get to the point of realizing the problems touched upon in > future books, but I don't believe Harry has really > understood yet. As I mentioned before, I think he already *instinctively* understands much better than Hermione in some ways, perhaps because he actually has a friendship with a liberated elf. Hermione, unfortunately, often shows elves the same kind of condescension that she's trying to fight. > A glimpse, yes, but nothing too profound at this point. I'll agree with that, certainly. ^_^ Again, it's Hermione's job to be profound about this issue. In the narrative sense, Harry has "bigger fish to fry". Laura From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 18:18:58 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:18:58 -0000 Subject: Ruminations on "THE" Veil and its effects... was: body... veil... where??? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127851 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marcelle" wrote: > > lots of SNIPPAGE > > > Chys: > >Maybe that's part of the mystery of the veil, and why it's located > in the DOM so they can study it? > > celle here: > > Although I think classical liturature would refute the idea, still, > I'd like to know IF there's more than one veil into the (insert your > idea of what is beyond). > > QUESTIONS: > Considering "the veil" as a reoccurring notion throughout (western?) > literature, is there only the one, "the" veil? ***And in JKR's > world, does the MOM now possess the only veil?*** Are there > other "veils" around planet earth in the WW? Did the WW confiscate > Hades' door and physically take it into their basement laboratory? > Are there several entrances into the world beyond the veil - perhaps > some that do *not* have an actual stone dais and curtain - maybe > just a straw covered pit with faint tiger growls, or a crack in the > ice over a frozen lake... > > If there is another way to go beyond the veil, perhaps there is > another way out... > > Requesting answers from the HPfGU experts out there, > celle > who is fine with the finality of SB's death and would be intruiged > by HP's visit to the underworld, but seriously doubts that will > happen because that story has already been written and it would take > away from the seriousness of "the second war", which doesnt seem so > scary yet...bella is more frightful than LV to me... I'm not one of the experts answering your post! I'm one of the novices posing another question. What is the veil "veiling"? Is it covering something (as the first verb definition) or is it hiding or disguising something (as in the second verb definition)? To me, that would be of utmost interest in determining just what happened to SB. Julie From siskiou at vcem.com Wed Apr 20 18:19:59 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 11:19:59 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: <6570713adff5c1b08c15af8e17c067b7@fandm.edu> References: <1099589038.20050419160057@vcem.com> <1297128873.20050419214301@vcem.com> <6570713adff5c1b08c15af8e17c067b7@fandm.edu> Message-ID: <243027646.20050420111959@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127852 Hi, Wednesday, April 20, 2005, 11:09:48 AM, Laura wrote: > I actually think it was a "fond" sort of grin, although it probably did > have something to do about her going off on SPEW. Here's an analogy: > Harry sees an article about something Quidditch related (perhaps about > the Chudley Cannons or Vicktor Krum, pre-GoF), and smiles to think of > Ron's humorously enthusiastic response to it. I don't think this is an > instance of Harry *mocking* or disrespecting Ron's interests in any > way, he has merely seen something that reminds him of his friend and > his smiling at the imagined response. I'm off to work, but just wanted to reply to the above since it relates. IIRC, he actually wanted to laugh with Ron about the way Hermione mangled a quidditch term, which is another example of Harry is not above "mocking" his friends (not that this is all that unusual for their age group, but sometimes Harry's and Hermione's relationship is presented as such an ideal one! ). Or was this just an analogy and it doesn't relate to the canon sample it reminded me of? But anyway, it still doesn't mean Harry likes either Hermione or Ron romantically, when he thinks of them in certain situations (unless it's a clearly romantic reaction). It would be very strange if Harry never spared a thought on his two best friends, and we get just the bare minimum as it is, even with Harry being the POV character (imo). -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Wed Apr 20 18:34:36 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:34:36 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ruminations on "THE" Veil and its effects... was: bod... Message-ID: <1d9.3ae305d5.2f97fabc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127853 In a message dated 4/20/2005 11:26:51 AM Pacific Standard Time, drjuliehoward at yahoo.com writes: I'm not one of the experts answering your post! I'm one of the novices posing another question. What is the veil "veiling"? Is it covering something (as the first verb definition) or is it hiding or disguising something (as in the second verb definition)? To me, that would be of utmost interest in determining just what happened to SB. Julie ***************************************************** Chancie: I too am very far from "expert" status when it comes to HP. But I have wondered if the veil had to do with the future... The reason I thought this is because Trelawney often uses the phrase "veil of the future" ... or something like that (I'm too lazy to get my books right now). Now exactly HOW the veil is related to the future I don't have much of a theory. The only option I could think of, is maybe it has something to do with the end of the world or something...which I kinda doubt. If any one has any guesses, please share. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Apr 20 18:51:59 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:51:59 -0000 Subject: Remus Lupin boring? Elkins' musings. Was :Re: Things I like about Harry (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127854 > Phoenixgod2000: > A rare note of disagreement. I think Lupin is boring. A nice guy and > a good teacher but I find him more than a little dull. Sirius on the > other hand... > > > Alla: > > You know, even when we disagree, I can see your POV so clearly. J > > I used to like Sirius SO much more than Remus, because indeed I > considered him a to be a boring character. I still like Sirius very > much, but Remus is grown on me significantly in the "excitement > department". His "excitement" is more subtle than > Sirius', but it is > there , IMO. I don't know. Sirius is just so vibrant while Remus is just sort of there. He lacks charisma and any sort of spark to me. I haven't really thought deeply about his character because nothing about him makes me want to think about his character. There's just no spark there, imo. I personally think that J & S thought Remus was the spy suspect simply by default. James and Sirius totally trusted each other and they could not concieve of Peter being the spy. He was just too timid. So if it was one of them, it must have been Lupin. I just think that in a world of characters to love or hate, Remus Lupin is just too bland to care about. phoenixgod2000 From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 19:02:34 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:02:34 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127855 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "brandy" wrote: > > > USA doesn't have government mandated standardized testing, ... > > > > As a side note, in the areas of the USA where states do have > > standardized testing, while the students are tested, it's actually > > the> school that is being graded. ... > > Brandy: > > Well, with No Child Left Behind there actually is government-mandated > standardized testing - but only in public schools. ... So a > wizarding school in the US wouldn't have any problems ... > bboyminn: Won't dwell on this because it's drifting off-topic, but unless I am mistaken, as I said above, the 'No Child Left Behind' policy is actually evaluating the Schools to asure that the schools are in fact giving the students an adequate education. If student overal standards are low and not improving, the government can threaten to take federal funds away from the school. Which makes prefect bureaucratic sense; if a school is doing poorly take away their money and they'll improve for sure. Those standardized test can probably be found in the students records, but are not a requirement for advancement or graduation. That's my best guess impression, not personally having kids in school, I'm sure others know better that I do. Others have pointed out off-line that there are a few states where State Mandated tests are tied to a student getting their high school certification/diploma. > Brandy continues: > > I always assumed this sort of thing (the child disappearing) was > partially dealt with through memory charms. If a muggle neighbor or > friend accidentally finds out too much about where a wizard child > goes to school, *poof* they don't know it anymore. > bboyminn: I don't have any doubt that on occasion when the situation become extreme enough Memory Charms are used. After all, the Ministry has a whole division dedicated to this task; the Obiviator Squad, but I think we need to be careful about using this as a quick and easy solution to any and all problems. First of all to use Memory Charms as a blanket solution to the whole 'missing student' problem would require action on a massive scale; erasing minds of school staff, friends and family, then altering many many official government records, etc.... It just seems that simple more common real world solutions could be found, solutions like 'lie about it'. So, agreed at various times, places, and under certain circumstances Memory Charms would come into play, but we need to resist Memory Charms as the quick and easy way out. > Brand Concludes: > > I mean, eventually the wizard kids have to basically disengage > completely from muggle society, don't they? So maybe it's best if > their muggle friends just forget they exist, they make new wizard > friends, and their only connection to muggles is their family. > > -Brandy bboyminn: I agree with your basic premise, but I'm not sure I would take it quite that far. True there would be some natural disengagement from the muggle world. In a sense, wizards have a very private, very special secret society, a secret society capable of providing for all of their basic needs. A secret society that provides them with the comfort and freedom to be themselves. But none the less, the real world is very close by and easily accessable. In the past I have used Chinatown as an example to illustrate the divide between the wizard world and the muggle world. It is very common for people in foreign contries to seek out enclaves of culture that mirror their own. Americans or Brits living in Thailand, seek out bars, cafes, other businesses and neighborhoods that cater to and reflect their home culture. Just as Chinese in London seek out London's Chinatown. But with each new generation the degree of divide between the cultures narrows. I suspect that young modern adults like Hermione, Harry, Dean, and Seamus are much more comfortable moving through both worlds, and with that comfort, they are likely to bring purebloods like Ron and Neville along to experience and become more comfortable in the muggle world. Remember, I'm speaking of them in their adult life; kids by their nature are resticted. I can even picture purebloods like Draco and friends going into the muggle world on a lark much the way a muggle might book a tour of Africa during which they would gawk and marvel out the tour bus window at the local natives. In that vein, I can see Draco and friends wandering cautiously around a shopping center laughing and pointing at the stupid, powerless, dull witted 'natives' then scurrying back to the safety of their own culture for a drink and another laugh. That said, the divide will never completely go away, only in the wizard world can wizards be completely free and comfortable; only there can they truly be themselves. As long as the mandate to keep the existance of wizards hidden exists, there will always be this secret society, and it's existence will always create varying degrees of cultural and physical isolation. Just making it up as I go along. Steve/bboyminn From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Apr 20 19:17:50 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:17:50 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127856 > > GEO: Yes, but a lot of the arguments for the H/Hr ship has been that > the potential and opportunity for a romantic relationship is greater > between the two of them because of their great friendship as many > have acknowledged and a certain lack of chemistry and attraction in > my opinion certainly doesn't nullify or sink the H/Hr ship. Phoenixgod2000: I think a lack of chemistry does sink a ship. romances don't spontaneously. I heard that people say that its better to be friends first and then lovers and that may be true but there has to be an underlying sexual attraction between them and there isn't even the vaguest character hint that they are attracted to each other. Symbolism, which I've noticed a lot of H/Hr'ers use don't count for much in my book. > GEO: And out of curiosity by what authority have you managed to > divine what kind of girl that Harry is looking for? So far from his > limited romantic experiences, it looks like he is picking them more > for appearance or superficial qualities than for their actual > character, which is surely going to end up in disaster for him. No, if he were picking girls based on appearances he would have been all over Fleur Delacour like Ron was and he wasn't. Even after he got an in with her by saving her sister. He liked Cho because he liked Cho. was Cho being pretty a help? Probably, but Harry doesn't seem to notice many pretty girls at Hogwarts so it must be something else too. Hell, we know more about the way Luna Lovegood looks than we know about most any other girl Harry's age. What does that say? Right now we don't know anything about what qualities Harry likes in girls except for he seems to dig them asian. > GEO: Yes it's strangely so annoying that the voices in his head have > begun to take the sound of her voice. And besides her nagging and > bossy nature manages to get through to him while the methods of so > many others failed. Harry never seems all that happy to hear Hermiones voice in his head when I read the books. And Hermione has the worst run of any character in the book when it comes to getting through to Harry. He lies to her face repeatedly in most every one of the books because he doesn't want to hear her lecture. Sounds like a firm basis for romance to me :) > GEO: Please elaborate. I'm rather curious on how that detracts from > a potential harry and hermione relationship. You don't think that having compatible senses of humor is important to a relationship? how many times in the series does hermione ever really laugh or crack a joke? I can't think of any right now. Hermione is actually kind of a joyless character with little if any sense of humor. I can't figure out why Ron *does* like her, let alone Harry possibly developing feelings for her. > > They do not have fun together when Harry needs someone > > to give him a few laughs. > > GEO: What he needs is someone that will try to ensure his mental > stability and physical safety. So far having someone to lighten the mood seems to be Ron's job. Ron's not going to be in Harry's marriage bed so I think having his signifcant other be someone who can lighten Harry's mood should be a must. And I think Harry already has plenty of people looking out for his physical safety. What he needs is someone who won't be forever dwelling on that stuff. He needs someone who can take his mind off of it. And that person is not going to be Hermione. phoenixgod2000 From redlena_web at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 19:22:42 2005 From: redlena_web at yahoo.com (redlena_web) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:22:42 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127857 mfterman wrote: > > The problem is that Hermione Granger exists in a huge list of > different files. Sooner or later someone would find a > discrepancy. > > > Even so, they'd be constantly using magic to expunge a huge > number of records and there's always the possibility that they'll > miss something important. > > No, there's a much simpler way: register Hogwarts with the > Muggle authorities as a British public school... > > Muggle-borns thus never drop off the radar, or even > Half-bloods who attended a Muggle primary school. They > simple in the records transfer to an obscure public school in > Scotland and that takes care of that. RedLena: Your idea would certainly be a viable alternative, but in my opinion, Wizards don't seem to always do things in the simplest way. Besides, what I am envisioning is something akin to using a stylesheet in the production of a big web site. Over time, as records for a particular child are created, these individual records are tagged in some way. These tags all reference one common stylesheet and when the child reaches the age of 11 and begins at Hogwarts, the stylesheet is altered so that *poof* all the child's Muggle records are altered auto-magically at the same time. So some Ministry of Magic employees (possibly interns?) spend their time tracking records to magically tag...not expunge or alter, just tag. And once a year a short list of stylesheets are adjusted for that year's group of First Years who are coming from the Muggle school system. While this might not seem like the simplest or most likely scenario to you (and perhaps it isn't), I'm having fun thinking out the details. -- RedLena From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Apr 20 20:01:35 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 20:01:35 -0000 Subject: Remus Lupin boring? Elkins' musings. Was :Re: Things I like about Harry (LONG) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127858 Phoenixgod200 wrote: > > I don't know. Sirius is just so vibrant while Remus is just sort of > there. He lacks charisma and any sort of spark to me. I haven't > really thought deeply about his character because nothing about him > makes me want to think about his character. There's just no spark > there, imo. > snip > > I just think that in a world of characters to love or hate, Remus > Lupin is just too bland to care about. Potioncat: Bland? Well, maybe. But he elicits an intense reaction on Snape's part. So much so, that Snape doesn't turn and leave Lupin's office, he backs out. So much so, that two months into the term he reminds Dumbledore that he protested the appointment. As sure as Snape is that Black was the traitor, he's convinced Lupin would be part of a continuing conspiracy. So bland that a recluse scurries out of her tower to pursue him over the Holidays? No charisma? What was it that motivated Hermione to keep the secret? The Marauders saw Lupin lie about his where-abouts month after month for seven years. Lie smoothly and well. A calm, unassuming demeanor hiding a beast. What else could he be hiding? They knew very well he wasn't reading the book that day after OWLs. He was watching them. Very good at hiding his thoughts and intentions. Very good at quietly paying attention while being invisible in plain sight. Bland? Like a fox maybe? From sharon8880 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 19:11:21 2005 From: sharon8880 at yahoo.com (sharon) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:11:21 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127859 Richard Jones wrote: SNIP SNIP SNIP > In her March 2004 interview, JKR was asked if Harry would fall > for another girl or would be too busy for romance? She answered > that "he'll be busy but what is life without a little romance?" > But I think romance will once again not be a prominent part of > HBP, and shippers who analyze each syllable for clues are going > to be disappointed. I have to agree that "a little romance" will be just that - a little romance. Shippers, myself included, hope that it's a clue to seeing the ship they want come to fruition. However, we know from experience that JKR probably won't do that. She likes to tease us readers from time to time. I doubt that the romance will even include Harry. It's more likely to be Hermione with Ron and/or Krum, or Ginny with whoever she's involved with at the time. Sharon From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Apr 20 21:04:19 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 21:04:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's transfer to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127860 Geoff: As this discussion on education has developed and we have inducted our friends from the US into the mysteries of the UK schools system, a remark recently by Steve as to whether Jo Rowling let the subject go "off page" has led me to think that, perhaps, we are making mountains out of molehills and that she did not plan the matter to be as important as we are making it. We know that when JKR wrote "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" she was not necessarily writing it as a children's book per se but certainly with children in mind and I would like to put forward two thoughts. Firstly, to the average young reader, the intricacies of the UK school transfer system are a closed book. They are used to moving between schools as they grow up but the mechanics of the change are in the hands of their teachers and their parents so oddities which we have raised about the change to Hogwarts would not occur to them. So including this in the book would possibly be a waste of energy. Secondly, in perhaps the traditions of children's books (and my mind goes to Roald Dahl's terrible family ? was it the Twits?), the Dursleys are really a caricature of a normal family and might well be seen by young readers in the same way that Cinderella's ugly sisters are perceived. Although Harry is a perfectly believable person, some of the things which happen to him are fantastical and so the Dursley's flight to the house on the rock, Hagrid's visit and the invitation to Hogwarts etc. are perhaps viewed initially with a pinch of salt. Many of these events become more grounded in reality as the books go on and become more serious and darker although there are still these fantastical events such as Aunt Marge's mishap to remind us that we /are/ in a magical environment. Even now, I still find one of the funniest moments for me is the demolition of the Dursley's fireplace by Arthur and Vernon's attempts to cling on to "normality" while this is going on. Perhaps we should spend less time trying to rationalise everything ? fun though this can be ? and occasionally just let the magic wash over us. If Steve will forgive me for pinching his tag line ? just one man's opinion. From KimberleyElizabeth at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 19:19:09 2005 From: KimberleyElizabeth at yahoo.com (kimberleyelizabeth) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:19:09 -0000 Subject: Hi, I'm new / HP favorites Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127861 I've been looking for a group for Grown Up Harry Potter fans like me. The teeny-bopper group get a little on my nerves sometimes. Anyway, I've been a fan for years now and maybe a little obsessed. Some of my favorites are: Movie - Sorcerer's Stone Book - Prisoner of Azkaban Student (other than Harry) - Neville Teacher - Snape (Of Course) Shipper - Ron and Hermione Theories - The New DADA Teacher is the HBP. - When Voldemort said that "One, I believe, has left me forever" I don't think he was talking about Sanpe. Can't really say for sure. - The protection charm between Harry and Petunia is going to come in handy very soon! This will be Petunia's finest hour. Any thought, commetns, reactions? Kimberley From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 21:11:26 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 21:11:26 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127862 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > No, if he were picking girls based on appearances he would have been > all over Fleur Delacour like Ron was and he wasn't. GEO: People were all over Fleur also certainly because she was a part Veela and we saw that one of their powers was the capability to entrance people, which Harry was able to fight off. Even after he > got an in with her by saving her sister. He liked Cho because he > liked Cho. was Cho being pretty a help? GEO: I recall that the very first description of Cho in PoA or GoF was that she was pretty so I for one certainly think that one of the multitude of reasons for his attraction to Cho was that she was pretty besides the few superficial similarities they shared. Probably, but Harry doesn't > seem to notice many pretty girls at Hogwarts so it must be something > else too. Hell, we know more about the way Luna Lovegood looks than > we know about most any other girl Harry's age. What does that say? GEO: Either because he's too distracted or because Rowling and her editors found it too tiresome to describe everyone of those minor characters who only have small parts to play in the story. > And Hermione has the worst run of any > character in the book when it comes to getting through to Harry. GEO: Seeing how she was the only one that managed to get him out of Buckbeak's room during the Vacation in OOTP, I would really disagree with your statement. > He > lies to her face repeatedly in most every one of the books because > he doesn't want to hear her lecture. GEO: Some examples would certainly be nice. Most of times that he does lie to her that I recall usually come back and trouble him in one way or another (legilimency, second task) so even though he might not like it, the nagging is usually to his benefit. Besides who has he not lied to? So far he has lied to everyone of his father figures and even to Ron for one reason or another. > Hermione is actually kind of a joyless character with little if any > sense of humor. I can't figure out why Ron *does* like her, let > alone Harry possibly developing feelings for her. GEO: Perhaps your failure to understand her character is why you fail to comprehend certain ships like R/Hr or H/Hr. > And I think Harry already has plenty of people looking out > for his physical safety. What he needs is someone who won't be > forever dwelling on that stuff. He needs someone who can take his > mind off of it. GEO: I really disagree here, he needs to deal and live with the fact that he is surrounded by dangers with or without Voldemort. He frankly doesn't really need a character that will help distract him from the troubles of his life. From slytherin_punk_pirate at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 20 20:55:01 2005 From: slytherin_punk_pirate at yahoo.co.uk (wysiwyg) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 20:55:01 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127863 Hi guys, I'm a long-time lurker who doesn't post often, so please forgive me if I haven't posted this correctly. Also, I couln't snip the many comments into a reasonable size and so I just started afresh with my opinions on the subject. I totally see where the people who think Hogwarts should have been a summer camp are coming from, but I disagree. For starters, anyone who doesn't want anything to do with the magical world has the chance to decline Hogwarts when they get their letter. Granted, very few 11 year olds know where they want to go with their life (I still don't, and I'm 24 this year), but I believe you would be leaving more doors open if you accept than if you decline. Although Hogwarts at times does seem to focus on 'party tricks' and effects, I don't believe we get the full picture from Harry's point of view. The only lessons we see are ones where something important happens or an important conversation/meeting takes place. Of course JKR isn't going to describe each and every lesson; that would be plain boring. However, many subjects (History of Magic and Transfiguration to name just two) require the students to write essays. Binns might be useless, but I can totally see McGonagall spending some time teaching students basic grammar and spelling, plus lessons on how to present essays. I also imagine some basic maths and science principles are explained in Potions. It may not seem much, but I can guarantee it's more than some 18 year olds know! Now I'm gonna try and describe a hypothetical situation I had in mind. Say Hermione graduates from Hogwarts and decides that she misses the muggle world and wants to move back into it. She could get a job doing something magical, yet rather mundane (for example working in a shop in Diagon Alley or a clerical job at the Ministry). With the money she makes she can afford to rent a flat anywhere in Britain that she chooses. Don't forget that a qualified witch/wizard who is of age can apparate - a luxury someone who didn't attend a magical school doesn't get. In her flat she can have a TV, internet access and a phone, with the added bonus that she can also have a fireplace connected to the floo network. Now for her career. If she really doesn't want a job in the magical world she still has options. She could get a job that doesn't require academic qualifications and work her way up through the company. She could even start her own company. If there's a problem concerning her whereabouts during her seven years at Hogwarts, then I'm sure a department at either the MoM or muggle parliament can sort it out for her without giving too much details. Don't forget that while most muggles are completely unaware of the magical community, the Prime Minister is. If she'd rather continue studying than get a full time job, she could do her GCSEs and A Levels at college, no problems. I've known people who failed their GCSEs at age 16, for whatever reason, but with a little hard work and determination went on to get degrees. Plenty of 18 year olds in Britain have no formal qualifications; it doesn't mean that society just gives up on them. Sorry for the length of the post, I just thought I'd throw a few ideas into the mix. To sum up, I appreciate the posts people have posted voicing their concerns about Hogwarts, but I don't think it's as big a deal as some people are making out. Hogwarts alumni are free to do virtually anything that a muggle college graduate can do with the added bonus, they can apparate, save on phone bills calling their old mates by using floo, use magic to make their cars (and presumably flats) bigger a la Arthur Weasley, move heavy objects easily, plus have the ability to use a huge collection of other useful spells. "wysiwyg" From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 21:57:59 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 21:57:59 -0000 Subject: ... muggle-borns... off the radar? St. Brutus Academy of Naughty Boys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127864 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > a_svirn wrote: > > > I always thought that St. Brutus was invented for the sole > benefit > > > of Marge who, judging by her firm belief in existing of corporeal > > > punishment in schools, seems to live in a time-wrap. I don't > think > > > that his neighbours would buy the story much less that he would > > > attempt to sell it. > > > > Geoff: > > I would agree with you completely. As Steve pointed out, Harry was > > supposed to go Stonewall High. > > > > St.Brutus' is a cover story for Marge - and possibly for anyone who > > troubled to ask Vernon. Considering the sort of area the Dursleys > > live in, I think that would be unlikely; Vernon would probably be > > steering conversation with the neighbours in the direciton of the > > weather and the lack of rain for the gardens or the state of the > > Footsie (FTSE = equivalent of the Dow Jones) or whether John Major > > was making a better job of things than Maggie Thatcher (bearing in > > mind this was in thee arly 1990s). > > > Ginger now: I agree that Vernon wouldn't encourage conversation > about Harry or his school and would most likely divert the > conversation. > > One point from OoP struck me. Ch. 1 US page 11: > Neighbourhood children all around were terrified of him (Dudley)- > even more terrified than they were of "that Potter boy", who, they > had been warned, was a hardened hooligan who attended St. Brutus's > Secure Centre for Incurably Criminal Boys. > > So not only did the story get around, it worked for both Vernon and > Harry's benefit. No worries about what to say when people ask about > your coursework or anything related to school at all. They just make > themselves scarce. Better than a Muggle repelling charm. > > Ginger, who thinks the Hardened Hooligans would be a great name for a > band. a_svirn: M.b. it was Dudley who spread the St.Brutus' rumours? After all it was children who were terrified. a_svirn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 22:07:07 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:07:07 -0000 Subject: Remus Lupin boring? and Dorothy Sayers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127865 Pippin: Trouble is, abhorrence never seems to have stopped Lupin from doing things he knew were wrong: allowing James and Sirius to have their way with Snape, endangering the lives of innocent villagers, and withholding information about Sirius and the Map from Dumbledore. Alla: Well, I think that it does not necessarily follow from all those things that person who did them is likely to go to Voldemort. Also, I think that the flaw, which JKR acknowledged Lupin has ( desire to be liked) also helps explain all these things. Pippin: Is it really so hard to understand how Lupin could turn away from DD? Dumbledore, some listies complain, is not particular enough about who his allies are. Some would rather see Harry get even with Umbridge and Snape than with Voldemort, whose fearsome image in the WW seems to them vastly exaggerated...is it conceivable that this is how young Lupin might have felt? And there's no backing away from the Death Eaters once you find out their reputation for murder isn't an exaggeration after all... Alla: I am afraid I don't understand the analogy,sorry again! Just as some listies feel that Harry should get even with Snape and Umbridge ( yes, please. :-)) rather than with Voldemort ( no, I want him to get even with all of them, but under certain circumstances he can leave Snape be, if Snape deserves it. :-)), Lupin might have felt that he would rather get even with whom rather with Voldemort? Have I misunderstood you? Look, the thing is that for all my desire to see Harry slap Snape and Umbridge, I do NOT think that JKR will go there ( and yes, I believe she can do it in a credible way), unless of course Snape will turn out to be ESE. :-) Therefore, I do not think that she will travel that road with Lupin either. But that is of course just my opinion and you ARE absolutely brilliant in arguing your theory. P.S. Quick question - I don't think I remember you saying what do you think about JKR wishing Lupin Happy Birthday? So, does she wish Happy Birthday to good guys only or not? I mean, it is a small metathinking hint, but I do think it IS a hint. Pippin: But you have to drop the idea that only a sadistic creep can be a murderer and consider that murder might be done by a decent enough person with something to hide. Alla: Yes, of course, I just don't think that Remus is such a person. :-) Pippin: That may be where the work of Dorothy Sayers comes in. (I recommend The Nine Tailors as a starting point. A locale almost as spooky as Hogwarts, and a death by no human hand.) Alla: Thanks, I think I will definitely take a look at her books. I read several books recommended by the listies and liked them very much. JMO, Alla From a_svirn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 20 22:16:35 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:16:35 -0000 Subject: How do Hogwarts' muggle-borns drop off the radar? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127866 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > I can even picture purebloods like Draco and friends going into the > muggle world on a lark much the way a muggle might book a tour of > Africa during which they would gawk and marvel out the tour bus window > at the local natives. a_svirn: Not to mention safari and some illicit hunting. Steve: >In that vein, I can see Draco and friends > wandering cautiously around a shopping center laughing and pointing at > the stupid, powerless, dull witted 'natives' then scurrying back to > the safety of their own culture for a drink and another laugh. > > a_svirn: Yes I agree. Moreover, paradoxically as it may seem, I believe that it is actually muggle-lovers and `centrists' who are so keen in maintaining the secrecy and the divide between the two worlds. Radical pure-blood could actually care less. So long that their "natural birthright" is assured and munbloods are kept in their place there is no reason for them to be discreet. This was the message behind that little DE performance at the World Cup. a_svirn From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Wed Apr 20 22:40:13 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:40:13 EDT Subject: Spider Webs..... Message-ID: <88.251c1c02.2f98344d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127867 Hi, I was just looking on TLC, and I saw something that I thought might be of interest. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The_ Harry Potter section _ (http://www.bloomsbury.com/harrypotter/) of Bloomsbury.com has a new look and some news for us today. First the news. The audio books of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince are set to be released on August 25th. _According to Bloomsbury_ (http://www.bloomsbury.com/harrypotter/default.asp?sec=4) : Second, the website [Bloomsbury] has gotten a makeover of sorts. There is a new layout that includes branches with lots of spider webs. For fun, _in the section about the Potter books_ (http://www.bloomsbury.com/harrypotter/default.asp?sec=2) , if you click on the image of the potions book (seen on the new UK adult cover of _HBP_ (http://www.hpandthehalfbloodprince.org/) )it floats about. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ What got me was the mention of the spider web. Does anyone think that Aragog has a part to play in HBP? As we all know JKR said that HBP has a connection to a discovery Harry made in CoS. Could this be it? Or am I just trying to analyze too much? Here is the link for anyone who's intrested _http://www.bloomsbury.com/harrypotter/default.asp?sec=2_ (http://www.bloomsbury.com/harrypotter/default.asp?sec=2) Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From siskiou at vcem.com Wed Apr 20 23:29:13 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:29:13 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <705011359.20050420162913@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127869 Hi, Wednesday, April 20, 2005, 2:11:26 PM, greatelderone at yahoo.com wrote: >> And I think Harry already has plenty of people looking out >> for his physical safety. What he needs is someone who won't be >> forever dwelling on that stuff. He needs someone who can take his >> mind off of it. > GEO: I really disagree here, he needs to deal and live with the fact > that he is surrounded by dangers with or without Voldemort. He > frankly doesn't really need a character that will help distract him > from the troubles of his life. I feel it needs to be someone who does a little bit of both. Having a break from his troubles is just as important as dealing with them, unless you want Harry to drive himself out of his mind before he ever gets to face down Voldemort, or fall apart completely right after. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Apr 20 23:39:13 2005 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 19:39:13 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" Message-ID: <1c5.266c880f.2f984221@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127870 In a message dated 4/20/2005 2:28:57 PM Central Standard Time, jmrazo at hotmail.com writes: Right now we don't know anything about what qualities Harry likes in girls except for he seems to dig them asian Really? We could also theorize that JKR was showing the qualities that the characters like via "types." For example: Cho is petite, with dark hair and eyes, smart, pretty and apparently very loyal to her friends (Marietta) Hermione is petite (she's been described as being about the same height as Harry and Harry is described as being small for his age) She has dark hair and eyes. Pretty (the Yule ball realization). She smart. (the most brilliant witch of her generation) and she's very loyal. Hermione OTOH seems to like world famous, Quidditch playing wizards. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 00:43:53 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 00:43:53 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127871 >In a message dated 4/20/2005 2:28:57 PM Central Standard Time, >jmrazo at hotmail.com writes: >Right now we don't know anything about what qualities Harry likes in >girls except for he seems to dig them asian > >Really? He seems to admire the Patil twins, and spent some time watching the light reflect off the long dark hair of one of them while she was sitting in front of him. And he did end up asking Parvati to the Yule Ball. As a totally unrelated note, according to the Harry Potter Lexicon, Padma's name means "lotus," perhaps following the WW custom of naming girls after flowers (Pansy, Narcissa, Lavender). I'm not counting Lily and Petunia because they're muggle-born and therefore not following WW custom (that we know of). Janet Anderson From lhuntley at fandm.edu Thu Apr 21 01:31:36 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 21:31:36 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: <243027646.20050420111959@vcem.com> References: <1099589038.20050419160057@vcem.com> <1297128873.20050419214301@vcem.com> <6570713adff5c1b08c15af8e17c067b7@fandm.edu> <243027646.20050420111959@vcem.com> Message-ID: <9e9ae3bb5e7347d6d1a3b53144e0ecd8@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 127872 Laura (me): >> I actually think it was a "fond" sort of grin, although it probably >> did >> have something to do about her going off on SPEW. Here's an analogy: >> Harry sees an article about something Quidditch related (perhaps about >> the Chudley Cannons or Vicktor Krum, pre-GoF), and smiles to think of >> Ron's humorously enthusiastic response to it. I don't think this is >> an >> instance of Harry *mocking* or disrespecting Ron's interests in any >> way, he has merely seen something that reminds him of his friend and >> is smiling at the imagined response. Susanne: > IIRC, he actually wanted to laugh with Ron about the way > Hermione mangled a quidditch term, which is another example > of Harry is not above "mocking" his friends (not that this > is all that unusual for their age group, but sometimes > Harry's and Hermione's relationship is presented as such an > ideal one! ). Well, we all know that no relationship is really ideal. ^_~ > Or was this just an analogy and it doesn't relate to the > canon sample it reminded me of? It was just a general analogy, but one that I chose because it seemed like something likely to happen in canon. > But anyway, it still doesn't mean Harry likes either > Hermione or Ron romantically, when he thinks of them in > certain situations (unless it's a clearly romantic > reaction). Oh, no. I wasn't trying to argue that it was. I am an H/Her, though, to be fair, so maybe my biases were showing? > It would be very strange if Harry never spared a thought on > his two best friends, and we get just the bare minimum as it > is, even with Harry being the POV character (imo). I *do* like it when Harry thinks of Ron and Hermione in their absence, even if it is only to smile at their overblown reactions to certain things. It's just so . . . I don't know, familiar and comforting -- thinking of them often cheers him up when he's alone and unhappy (i.e. at the Dursleys). Of course, I absolutely loved that the images of Ron and Hermione's faces were what allowed him to defeat the dementors in OotP! Laura From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 01:50:00 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 01:50:00 -0000 Subject: Hagrid's Tale (was:Re: What would dissapoint you about HBP? -- Grawp) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127873 Amiable Dorsai wrote: > I think the Grawp business is a lit fuse for a plot bomb in book 6 or > 7. I expect, uhm, big things from him. Carol responds: *I'm* afraid that it's a set-up to create a politically correct view of giants, who IMO deserve their bad reputation (as do Trolls). Hagrid's mother deserted him. Giants kill humans and each other indiscriminately. They are apparently (with, I fear, the exception of "little" Grawpy) ineducable. Granted, it's unfair to discriminate against Hagrid or Madame Maxime as the offspring of a (highly improbable) mixed species union, but I see nothing wrong with viewing full-blooded giants objectively as both naturally violent and less intelligent than human beings. I don't want to see Hermione extending SPEW to include rights for giants, but that's what I'm afraid will happen. Granted, wizards should not go out and destroy the giants, but the giants *do* need to be confined to the mountains they now live in and not allowed to kill human beings. FWIW, they'll probably kill each other off in any case. As for Grawp, he may be loyal to "Hagger" and fond in his brutish way of "Hermy," but he is no more capable of living free among humans than a Hungarian Horntail. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 02:35:33 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 02:35:33 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127875 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sandra87b" wrote: > > ReturnOfTheMutt at a... wrote: > > I think the school's purpose is to teach the kids to control > > their magic. It's probably dangerous for a wizard to be > > untrained. They might use it unintentionally. > > > Thanks for the reply, but I'm still in the dark. They might learn > how to control their magic, but what can they actually do for the > rest of their lives? They can only go to wizard-related > universities, work in wizard-related industries in the > wizard-world... because if they live in the muggle world, all the > years of magic-training is worthless. I just think JKR has created > a poorly thought out world, that's all. > > Sandra Carol responds: I read the responses to this post and didn't see any that made this specific point: There aren't any wizarding universities. The NEWTs are sufficient (apparently) to make a person a fully qualified wizard. >From there, a wizard (for example, an auror in training) receives additional training specific to his chosen field. As you say, none of this education and training prepares a student for life in the *Muggle* world. The assumption is clearly that the student will want to remain in the WW, that he or she will *prefer* it to the "medieval" WW. I can understand your thinking for Muggleborns and half-bloods but certainly not for purebloods, even those without the Slytherin prejudice against Muggleborns. It seems to me that a student like Justin Finch-Fletchley, who chose to attend Hogwarts over Eton, must have done so knowing what he was giving up. His father, no doubt an Eton grad himself, would have pointed out the advantages of an Eton education. And Justin himself, after a year at Hogwarts, could have made the choice to go back, to enter Eton a year late and acquire the Muggle education he could never acquire at Hogwarts if he so chose. But we don't see any children making that choice. All of them--not only Justin but Hermione and the Muggle-raised Dean Thomas and every other Muggleborn and Half-blood in the school--choose Hogwarts over conventional British education. Yes, even in the WW there might be some advantages to learning French or German as electives if a student wanted to be a diplomat within the WW, and I as a former English teacher am disappointed that they don't learn literature, but they are receiving the education they need to find a job in the WW. Potions is at least as useful to them as Chemistry to a Muggle child; Herbology and COMC provide hands-on lessons in biology. And they also learn Astronomy, another science. And DADA is a practical necessity in a dangerous magical world. As others in this thread have pointed out, there's a wide range of occupations in the WW, from dragon tamer to healer to auror, most of which offer a great deal more excitement than accounting or plumbing or editing (my mundane Muggle job). Quite possibly there are wizard architects and civil engineers as well. The on-the-job training they would receive would be very different from what they would learn in a Muggle university, but it would serve their need to learn *magical* engineering and architecture far better than Muggle booklearning and blueprints. You say that "they can only work in wizard-related industries in the wizard-world... because if they live in the muggle world, all the years of magic-training is worthless." But you seem to be missing the point. They don't *want* to work in the Muggle world. The WW is, for them, much more exciting. Possibly some Muggleborn children who receive their Hogwarts letter decide not to attend or are prevented from doing so by their parents, but the children we see in the HP books like the WW and want to be part of it. They don't care that they're not being adequately prepared to live in the Muggle world because they've put the Muggle world behind them. They learn what they need to know to be part of the WW, and that is mostly spells and potions and herbology, with a smattering of magical history and astronomy for those inclined in that direction. Given the jobs available in the WW, these are the subjects that they need. It does seem sad that they're deprived of training in music and languages and literature, but we as readers perceive a need that the wizards themselves evidently don't see. Or perhaps JKR, wanting to separate the WW from the Muggle world as fully as possible, chose not to incorporate those subjects into the curriculum. (I like to think that a good Muggleborn Muggle Studies teacher could sneak them in.) Carol From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 02:40:11 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 02:40:11 -0000 Subject: Remus Lupin boring? Elkins' musings. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127876 -- Elkins (quoted by Alla) Even Lupin's compassion could, viewed in a certain light, make him seem a little suspicious, because it's a compassion born of sensitivity and insight, of the ability to "read" others, to deduce other people's personal vulnerabilities and motives. Lupin's very good at that; it's what makes him a good teacher. But that form of sensitivity can also be a rather unnerving trait, particularly in a paranoid situation, one in which there are *secrets* that must be kept hidden. On a certain level, an emotionally astute individual *is* a spy -- he knows your secrets...or at least he makes you feel as if he does -- and I don't think that it did much for the others' sense of security around Lupin. I think that his very sensitivity probably made him seem suspect. Bookworm: Elkins' comments were posted in February 2002 ? 4 months before OoP was released. Now that we know about Legilimency, this paragraph is even more provocative. phoenixgod2000: I personally think that J & S thought Remus was the spy suspect simply by default. James and Sirius totally trusted each other and they could not concieve of Peter being the spy. He was just too timid. So if it was one of them, it must have been Lupin. Bookworm: Dumbledore suspected there was a spy *in the Order*. It did not have to be one of the Marauders, it could have been someone else in the Order. Ravenclaw Bookworm From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 21 02:51:32 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 02:51:32 -0000 Subject: What's the point of Hogwarts? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127877 Carol wrote: > It does seem sad that they're deprived of training in music and > languages and literature, but we as readers perceive a need that the > wizards themselves evidently don't see. Or perhaps JKR, wanting to > separate the WW from the Muggle world as fully as possible, chose not > to incorporate those subjects into the curriculum. (I like to think > that a good Muggleborn Muggle Studies teacher could sneak them in.) Potioncat: Hi Carol, good to see you ::waves:: Although the Harry Potter books aren't children's books, and JKR writes for herself, I think she designed Hogwarts with a child's heart. Think of it, if you were a schoolkid, wouldn't you prefer to imagine a school that taught Charms, Potions, Transfigurations, etc, rather than Literature, Algebra, Biology, etc.? As it is, Hogwarts is just as terrible as a RL school, with mean teachers, homework and standardised tests! Also, from memory here, didn't Bagman say that Fudge spoke several languages in OoP? There must be some school/training for that. (Or one heck of a cool charm!) Potioncat, now going to count her posts for today. From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 03:02:29 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 03:02:29 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid's Tale (was:Re: What would dissapoint you about HBP? -- Grawp) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127878 Carol said: >*I'm* afraid that it's a set-up to create a politically correct view >of giants, who IMO deserve their bad reputation (as do Trolls). *snips accurate description of Giants* Add me to the list of those who a) don't like Grawp and b) fear you are right. And "highly improbable" doesn't even begin to describe half-Giant parentage -- and I'm not referring to the, er, logistical aspects but to questions of "How do Giants and humans meet socially, let alone fall in love?" Giants and humans don't communicate well, don't live in the same places, and Giants are, by our limited evidence, creatures of impulse; today's best friend may be tomorrow's enemy to be eradicated with the nearest big rock. Wizard/muggle marriages are The Girl Next Door in comparison. There is one thing, though. Dumbledore put his foot down when Lupin forgot his potion and endangered the students. He will undoubtedly put it down again if Hagrid tries to settle Grawp anywhere other than the remotest part of the Forbidden Forest. Janet Anderson (And mind you, Hagrid is one of my favorite characters ...) From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Thu Apr 21 03:09:20 2005 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 20:09:20 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Disappointed in Potter? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <171101924.20050420200920@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127879 Geoff B.: GB> As a large group, we can analyse the story down to the last full GB> stop and use a scalpel to dissect each paragraph but I think we GB> need to realise that Jo Rowling is actually human and that parts of GB> the storyline have not been fully realised, perhaps because she GB> did not feel it was necessary ... So let's give JKR a break. Me: I agree with what you say, and I think it's worth noting that this kind of continuity nit-picking exists in every fan realm I have been involved with, from the Oz Books to the British Sci-Fi series _Red Dwarf_. And compared to many worlds, such as the two just named, the Potterverse is fairly consistant and fleshed out, whereas the attitude of the authors of those other worlds are basically "continuity, shmontinuity". This results in worlds of myriad vagaries, where, among many others, the Wizard of Oz goes from "a very good man" to ESE and back again, and Dave Lister has his appendix out *twice*. So, yes, let's give Jo a break, and be grateful that our continuity arguments are *NOTHING* compared to what goes on in other fandoms. -- Dave From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 03:22:23 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 03:22:23 -0000 Subject: Spider Webs..... In-Reply-To: <88.251c1c02.2f98344d@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127880 Chancie Second, the website [Bloomsbury] has gotten a makeover of sorts. There is a new layout that includes branches with lots of spider webs. What got me was the mention of the spider web. Does anyone think that Aragog has a part to play in HBP? As we all know JKR said that HBP has a connection to a discovery Harry made in CoS. Could this be it? Or am I just trying to analyze too much? Bookworm: IIRC, the 2nd chapter of HBP is called Spinner's End. This ties in with your idea that Aragog will reappear (and the new decorations at Bloomsbury.com). Ravenclaw Bookworm From DaveH47 at mindspring.com Thu Apr 21 03:41:19 2005 From: DaveH47 at mindspring.com (Dave Hardenbrook) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 20:41:19 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why do I love OOTP so much? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1235361478.20050420204119@mindspring.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127881 Monday, April 18, 2005, 7:30:27 PM, bbkkyy55 wrote: b> Why do I love this pathos so much? Am I nuts? Doesn't anyone b> out there love OOTP the best? I'd say it's the one I've grown fondest of, partly for the reasons you mention, but admittedly also because of the way it became an errily uncanny parallel of my own life in the year the book came out: -- My mom "went through the veil", and I felt like I was suddenly in another "universe" (American Ed., top of page 866) -- I finally discovered my vocational calling: Ridding computers of "dark magic", i.e. repairing them. (Harry --> Auror) -- I discovered my inner leadership abilities as I became president of my Toastmasters Club. (Harry and the DA) -- My first few months as president, I had to deal with the crisis of a tyrannical sadist and his attempts to bully other Club members. (Umbridge) -- I began to take private singing lessons (as much a challenge for me as Occulmency), which ended in short-term disaster, as a tragically unfortunate gaffe on my part caused my first teacher to cast me off with epic wrath. (Snape's Worst Memory) -- I made many new friends, and am filled with indescribable joy to always "see them ranged there, on my side" (American Ed., p. 870) So in short, OOP is the book where I found myself really identifying with Harry, and so fills me with an especial affection for "Year 5". -- Dave From jmrazo at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 04:04:28 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 04:04:28 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127882 > GEO: People were all over Fleur also certainly because she was a > part Veela and we saw that one of their powers was the capability to > entrance people, which Harry was able to fight off. phoenixgod2000: Fleur was pretty even without active use of the charm. Ron certainly couldn't stand to be around her charm or not. But when Fleur kisses Harry and thanks him? Nothing. He didn't feel anything. That shows that he's not just after the prettiest girl in any given room. > > And Hermione has the worst run of any > > character in the book when it comes to getting through to Harry. > > GEO: Seeing how she was the only one that managed to get him out of > Buckbeak's room during the Vacation in OOTP, I would really disagree > with your statement. And I would disagree with you that it was Hermione alone who did that alone. And even if she did, being able to help someone doesn't indicate potential romance. There have been plenty of dark times in my life that my friends have helped me out of and I have helped them in turn. doesn't mean any of us are running off together. Hermione is one of harry's friends and she showed it by being one of the people to help him out of his rut. > GEO: Some examples would certainly be nice. He lies to her when she asks for his help with spew in OOTP He lies to her when she asks if he's started Occulomency training again. He hates spending time with her alone when he and ron are fighting in GoF. Something tells me that he didn't exactly share that little fact with her (I believe) that he lies to her when he thinks Ron is right during the scabbers fiasco. These are the only ones that pop to mind right away, but I haven't read the books in a while. I sure there are others with a vaster knowledge on the subject than me. > Most of times that he does lie to her that I recall usually come > back and trouble him in one way or another (legilimency, second > task) so even though he might not like it, the nagging is usually to > his benefit. People who nag are always doing it for someone's benefit. It's just the way least likely to get that person to do what you want. > GEO: Perhaps your failure to understand her character is why you > fail to comprehend certain ships like R/Hr or H/Hr. No, I understand Hermione just fine. I've dated girls like Hermione. I've taught girls like Hermione. At times in my life I've been like Hermione (we all have our moments :). I understand her motivations just fine. What I don't understand is the appeal in Hermione or people like them. Does she ever laugh or joke? Is she ever just a girl instead of crusader? Is she ever just content to spend time with her friends without trying to convince them of something? Does she ever have any *fun*? Her heart is in the right place all the time but I cannot understand why anyone would subject themselves to a relationship with her. > GEO: I really disagree here, he needs to deal and live with the fact > that he is surrounded by dangers with or without Voldemort. He > frankly doesn't really need a character that will help distract him > from the troubles of his life. If all he ever focuses on are the dangers he's in or the causes he could support he won't have a life. phoenixgod2000, who wants to like Hermione because her hearts in the right place but finds her too annoying to sympathize with. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 04:08:59 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 04:08:59 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter (OoP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127883 - Geoff: > To add to the lists from other people... > > McGonagall's sparring matches with Umbridge.... Carol: Snape snarkily saving Neville from being suffocated by Goyle. . . From zarleycat at sbcglobal.net Wed Apr 20 23:33:52 2005 From: zarleycat at sbcglobal.net (kiricat4001) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 23:33:52 -0000 Subject: Will Harry recover too fast? (was Re: What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127884 Naama: > My feeling is that the opposite will happen - that HBP, as far as > Harry's emotional development goes, will be dominated by Sirius' > death. At the end of OoP, Harry is left with a huge baggage that > he has just taken the first step to deal with (the first step > being starting to grieve - with Luna's help). > Harry hasn't accepted reasonable responsibility to Sirius' death > - the guilt is so unbearable to him right now, that he projects > it on Snape (that's how I understand it, anyway). That's a huge > deal - consciously, he blames Snape of the death of the most > important person in the world to him. That has to blow up at some > point - and very dramatically (if not tragically). Marianne: I hope you're right and Harry doesn't simply bounce back, emotionally battered, but still struggling valiantly onward. If it ties into his relationship with Snape, so much the better. I really have to read OoP again, but my lingering feeling is that Harry's blame of Snape and lack of recognition of the part he himself played in Sirius' death may be a matter of the events still being too recent and raw for him to have developed any perspective yet. Or be able to examine his own actions. Naama: > Although you point to some steps that Harry has taken in dealing > with Sirius' death, they are mostly about getting over the denial > - that Sirius can somehow be gotten back, that it didn't really > happen. Harry has reached the point where he accepts, > emotionally, Sirius' death - now there's tons of grief and rage > for him to go through. Marianne: I see your point, and it makes me wonder if Harry's struggle (or one of them) in sixth year will be an attempt to completely stifle his grief and rage because he believes that he needs to be in total control of his emotions in order to be at his strongest against Voldemort. And if Snape winds him up just a bit too far, perhaps we'll see the mother of all CAPLOCKS!HARRY. Marianne From imontero at iname.com Wed Apr 20 23:35:13 2005 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 23:35:13 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127885 > phoenixgod2000: > > And Hermione has the worst run of any character in the book > > when it comes to getting through to Harry. > > GEO: Seeing how she was the only one that managed to get him > out of Buckbeak's room during the Vacation in OOTP, I would > really disagree with your statement. Luna: Hi GEO! Just my two knuts. Hermione managed to get him out of Buckbeak's room, but she was unable to cheer him up or take him out of his dark mood. It was Ginny the one who really got to him and gave him hope. I think this was team work actually, Hermione taking Harry to Ginny and Ron and Ginny the one actually getting to Harry's heart. If I have to take this scene as an example of who has more possibilities to become Harry's future LI and seeing how Ginny was the only one who managed to get him out of his dark mood and give him hope, I'd choose Ginny... From DANCERWH86 at aol.com Thu Apr 21 04:53:35 2005 From: DANCERWH86 at aol.com (DANCERWH86 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 00:53:35 -0400 Subject: Harry's Transfer to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <1114056577.22465.67963.m1@yahoogroups.com> References: <1114056577.22465.67963.m1@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C7144535D3A2E6-210-57D9@mblk-d17.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127886 Geoff Wrote <<>> I agree that it really isn't an issue. I know there are obviously school system differences between the UK and US (I mean US speaking it varies state to state on some points), but speaking from personal experience, a lot of kids transfer out of school systems. I for one went to private high school from public middle school. But I had to register at the public school as a precaution, pick classes, the whole nine yards. After two weeks, my mother received a phone call asking if I was attending or not and she said no, I was attending Sacred Heart Academy, not the public high school. There was no truancy problems or anything on my record so they took for truth. I don't think there would be enough students to raise suspicion and the families can easily cover if Child and Family bizarrely asked after the child. Just a thought, though. Lindsay ~~~~~ I once saw a forklift lift a crate of forks. And it was way too literal for me! ~Mitch Hedberg From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 08:53:05 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:53:05 -0000 Subject: My HBP Disappointments In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127887 > lupinore asked: what would disappoint you about HBP? (book 6) Disappointments? If the HBP was the guy who wrote that potions book on the adult cover. If Harry stays with Cho. (It's just not working out.) If Hermione doesn't wake up to reality, so to speak. If Ron's permanently disabled/killed somehow. If there's not more of Snape, and him teaching DADA. If any mention of Umbridge returns to the books. If Harry ends up back at 4 Privet at the end of the book. If something (some kind of rebellion, law, or movement) isn't made in benefit of Magical Creatures sometime in the near future, aside from SPEW, which doesn't count. Chys From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Apr 21 10:17:42 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:17:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's Transfer to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <8C7144535D3A2E6-210-57D9@mblk-d17.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127888 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, DANCERWH86 at a... wrote: Lindsay: > I agree that it really isn't an issue. I know there are obviously school system differences between the UK and US (I mean US speaking it varies state to state on some points), but speaking from personal experience, a lot of kids transfer out of school systems. Geoff: I think you are speaking of the US system here. In the UK, the percentage of transfers from state to independent or vice versa is very small. From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Thu Apr 21 04:08:59 2005 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 00:08:59 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: The Wizarding World: Expulsion & Hogwarts School References: Message-ID: <4267275B.000001.01492@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 127889 Steve, I want to thank you for the explanation. I was basing my thoughts on tuition (yes, I'm in the States) on the chapter, "The Keeper of the Keys" in Sorcerer's Stone, page 59 of my copy, where Uncle Vernon yelled, " I AM NOT PAYING FOR SOME CRACKPOT OLD FOOL TO TEACH HIM MAGIC TRICKS!" I never gave endowments a thought. I'm way behind in my reading of posts and I know that there has been a discussion on what the young wizards and witches do after finishing their 7 years at Hogwarts. I apologize if I am repeating something someone else has said. I can see the wizard-born children staying in the wizard world since that's all they've known but, I feel many of the muggle-born children would go back to their muggle world since that's were their family and early experiences are, possibly pursuing further muggle education, but covertly using their magic for their and others good. Donna [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 12:46:38 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:46:38 -0000 Subject: Things I like about Harry Potter (OoP) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127890 > Carol adds: > Snape snarkily saving Neville from being suffocated by Goyle. . . Ginger: Good one! I loved the pensieve scene. We've been hoping for Snape to get what's coming to him. Although this was terribly out of chronology for Snape, as a reader, I loved it. Who would have guessed Snape's comeuppance would have been a dropdownance? And, Carol, kudos to you for your suggestion that any who may feel the need to unload their books do so by giving them to the library. Let me also suggest a good thrift store where the money will go to charity, if they have such a thing in the area where any effected persons live. Let one person's loss be another's gain. Ginger, who would never give up the books, but will be gravely disappointed if book 6 ends with a preposition. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 12:55:07 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:55:07 -0000 Subject: ... muggle-borns... off the radar? St. Brutus Academy of Naughty Boys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127891 > > a_svirn wrote: > M.b. it was Dudley who spread the St.Brutus' rumours? After all it > was children who were terrified. Ginger again: I have to admit ignorance as to what M.b. means. Sorry about that. As to Dudley spreading the rumours, you may well be right. We only know Vernon told Marge that. We assume he would have told the neighbours, had they asked. Somehow from the way it was worded "they had been warned...(he was) a hardened houligan" struck me as though the parents were doing the warning. I can't imagine Dudley saying "Watch out for my cousin. He's a hardened houligan." I can more see him saying "Watch out for my mad cousin. He'll suck out your eyeballs as you sleep." Or something like that. That's just the way I read it. It could be either, or a little of both. Or Petunia. I can just hear her saying "hardened houligan." Ginger, glad it's Thursday From greatelderone at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 13:53:24 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 13:53:24 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127892 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > phoenixgod2000: Fleur was pretty even without active use of the > charm. Ron certainly couldn't stand to be around her charm or not. GEO: If you hadn't noticed, Ron didn't exact prove to be a master of resisting magical mind control as seen earlier when he and the majority of the gryffindors all fell easily under Imperius courtesy of the false Professor Moody. > But when Fleur kisses Harry and thanks him? Nothing. He didn't feel > anything. That shows that he's not just after the prettiest girl in > any given room. GEO: Especially when his sights were already on Cho. > He lies to her when she asks for his help with spew in OOTP > He lies to her when she asks if he's started Occulomency training > again. GEO: Again how is that different from him lying to Ron, Sirius, Remus and Hagrid. Heck he lies to almost all of them for one reason of another. > He hates spending time with her alone when he and ron are fighting > in GoF. GEO: He hated spending time with her in the library when he had a dragon to deal with and with his additional estrangement to Ron. Not exactly the best of conditions mind you > Luna: > Hi GEO! Just my two knuts. Hermione managed to get him out of > Buckbeak's room, but she was unable to cheer him up or take him > out of his dark mood. It was Ginny the one who really got to him > and gave him hope. GEO: If I recall she cheered him up by giving him information that turned out to be false and misleading so in the end listening to Ginny really didn't turn out to be his benefit considering his posssession by Voldemort was quite different than that she experiences via his diary. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Apr 21 14:43:10 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:43:10 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127893 Janet: > There is one thing, though. Dumbledore put his foot down when > Lupin forgot his potion and endangered the students. He will > undoubtedly put it down again if Hagrid tries to settle Grawp > anywhere other than the remotest part of the Forbidden Forest. SSSusan: Oh, but he didn't put his foot down (that we know of). Lupin chose to *resign* once the news "slipped" that he was a werewolf, because he understood that parents would not want somebody like him teaching their children. Now, it *is* interesting to note that the line used in the movie -- "DD has already risked enough on my behalf" -- does not occur in the book. So, technically, it's possible that, had Lupin not resigned, DD would have put his foot down. What do people think? Would DD have done, had Lupin not volunteered to go? Siriusly Snapey Susan From sherriola at earthlink.net Thu Apr 21 15:04:01 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:04:01 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" Message-ID: <32033628.1114095841822.JavaMail.root@skeeter.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127894 > Most of times that he does lie to her that I recall usually come > back and trouble him in one way or another (legilimency, second > task) so even though he might not like it, the nagging is usually to > his benefit. People who nag are always doing it for someone's benefit. It's just the way least likely to get that person to do what you want. Sherry now: Many years ago, someone read me a very amusing but appropriate exchange in an Ann Landers column. For people unfamiliar with Landers, she was an advice columnist for many years. Anyway, it dealt with nagging. A woman wrote in and declared that if women love their husbands, they should nag them--to quit smoking, to quit drinking, to eat better, to get more rest--you get the idea. The woman said that this constant nagging would add years to men's lives by keeping them healthy. In other words, the woman said that other women should consider it their duty to nag their husbands constantly so the guys would live longer. Landers' response was, "Who would want more years of that?" I do like Hermione in many ways, but her nagging doesn't ever seem to do any good in the end. Nagging is guaranteed to make most people close their ears. I know that's how I react to it. And as for the comment that Harry needs Hermione to be constantly reminding him of all that is at stake, and that he doesn't have time to have fun in his life--excuse me, I'm not quoting that exactly right, I know--I think that Harry MUST have times for fun and laughter. Soldiers in all kinds of wars, others in extreme danger, find time to laugh. It seems to be part of the necessary survival skills. I think the human mind and body can only take so much, and if the tension isn't relieved a bit by some lighthearted good times and happiness, we would all crack up for good. Harry has such a terrible burden to carry, and the times with his friends, the way he feels with the Weasleys, the laughter he shares with ron, these are necessary to his survival and his ability to continue the fight. just my opinion of course. sherry From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 15:06:21 2005 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:06:21 -0000 Subject: HBP Disappointments = Anti-Predictions = HBP Contest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chys Sage Lattes" wrote: > > If something (some kind of rebellion, law, or movement) isn't made in > benefit of Magical Creatures sometime in the near future, aside from > SPEW, which doesn't count. It seems to me, too, that SPEW was a bad example of a good idea, to recoin a cliche. There should be, in HBP or #7, a proper revolution of magical creatures. ("Do you hear the magical creatures sing? Singing a song of angry magical creatures. It is the music of a magical creatures who will not be slaves again!" There's a filk in there somewhere.) Other things that I predict will *NOT* happen in HBP: Voldemort will not die (unless he's just the front man for the *real* evil guy, see previous posts about "if Voldemort is the monkey, who is grinding the organ?") Harry will not die (unless the last book has a really different title.) Hermione and Ron will not die yet (unless Luna and Neville get really interesting.) Umbridge will not be the DADA teacher. The Centaurs will not come skipping into Hogwarts, offering free pony rides. House Elves will not turn into Gremlins if you feed them after midnight. Scabbers will not come out of hiding because he was just an ordinary rat after all. We will not find Scabbers and Crookshanks curled up, napping together. Aberforth Dumbledore will not marry the goat because they have a kid. Azkaban will not become a minimum-security, Club Fed lock-up with macrame classes and Christian rehabilitation counseling. It not was all just a dream. TK -- TigerPatronus! P.S. -- You all are beginning to compile your predictions lists, right? We are going to have some sort of contest for the most accurate predictions about HBP, right? From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 15:31:24 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:31:24 -0000 Subject: HBP Disappointments = Anti-Predictions = HBP Contest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" wrote: > > We are going to have some sort of contest for the most accurate > predictions about HBP, right? Tonks: Great idea!! Any elves listening?? I would love this!!! I am very good at guessing things. Got the pope right. ;-) So please, please list adm. give us a contest. Maybe the price could be free tickets to the Movie coming up. Or free butter beer, I don't care. I just want to play... and win, of course. Tonks_op From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 15:35:32 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:35:32 -0000 Subject: Prophecy, Potters, Longbottoms, and the Fidelius Charm Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127897 This question may cover a multiplicity of issues, but I am going to attempt to be brief. Here are some givens that we know: 1. When the prophecy was first made, it was unclear if the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord was the son of the Potters or the son of the Longbottoms. Both couples had defied the Dark Lord three times and both had sons born as the seventh month died. 2. The Potters were protected by the Fidelius Charm with Peter Pettigrew as their Secret Keeper. 3. LV came first to the Potters, and badda-bing, VaporMort, Scar, series of beloved books. Variations/Issues already discussed: 1. Harry Potter was "the one" meant from the time the prophecy was made. 2. Harry Potter became "the one" when he was marked by LV that night at Godric's Hollow. 3. Could Neville be "the one"? Questions I have: 1. Are we sure LV is the one the prophecy is about? This may seem like a given, but I try to recognize an assumptions, even if it is a fairly likely one. (I do not have my book with me, and this may be stated specifically in canon. I can't remember. It is possible that all in the Wizarding World also made the assumption that it was LV without him being named specifically.) 2. If Neville also was considered as "the one" prior to that night at GH, were the Longbottoms protected by the Fidelius Charm as well as the Potters? a. If not, why not? b. If so, who was their Secret Keeper and why were they betrayed? Julie From sophierom at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 15:55:24 2005 From: sophierom at yahoo.com (sophierom) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 15:55:24 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127898 > Janet: > > There is one thing, though. Dumbledore put his foot down when > > Lupin forgot his potion and endangered the students. He will > > undoubtedly put it down again if Hagrid tries to settle Grawp > > anywhere other than the remotest part of the Forbidden Forest. > > > SSSusan: > Oh, but he didn't put his foot down (that we know of). Lupin chose > to *resign* once the news "slipped" that he was a werewolf, because > he understood that parents would not want somebody like him teaching > their children. > > Now, it *is* interesting to note that the line used in the movie -- > "DD has already risked enough on my behalf" -- does not occur in the > book. So, technically, it's possible that, had Lupin not resigned, DD > would have put his foot down. > > What do people think? Would DD have done, had Lupin not volunteered > to go? Sophierom: Dumbledore has been known to give people second chances after making big mistakes ... Sirius played the prank on Snape and wasn't expelled. Snape was a Death Eater and was brought into the fold (so far as we know!). So, I would like to believe that DD would have given Lupin a second chance, could he have done so. (It's hard to say what the Board of Governors might have forced him to do; we do know, based on events in CoS, that Lucius Malfoy has the power, in extreme circumstances at least, to make major changes at Hogwarts.) However, had Lupin not volunteered to resign, I would have had less respect for him; remaining in his position would have made things tough for DD and Hogwarts, and he realized this. Of course, had Lupin remained in the position, fake!Moody wouldn't have been able to engineer the return of LV in GoF... And this makes me think about the DADA professor in HBP (and I know this group has speculated about this a great deal already). Surely Dumbledore has to have learned by now that he has to find an absolutely trustworthy DADA professor? He's had two very bad years of DADA professors ... and now LV is back at full strength. Connecting this post to the thread about HBP predictions and potential disappointments, I'll be disappointed if the new DADA professor is a fraud or a danger. Dumbledore would be better off teaching the subject himself if he can't find anyone he trusts. Best, Sophie From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Apr 21 16:22:33 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:22:33 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" Message-ID: <1c8.27388f5c.2f992d49@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127899 In a message dated 4/21/2005 6:58:19 AM Pacific Standard Time, greatelderone at yahoo.com writes: > Luna: > Hi GEO! Just my two knuts. Hermione managed to get him out of > Buckbeak's room, but she was unable to cheer him up or take him > out of his dark mood. It was Ginny the one who really got to him > and gave him hope. GEO: If I recall she cheered him up by giving him information that turned out to be false and misleading so in the end listening to Ginny really didn't turn out to be his benefit considering his possession by Voldemort was quite different than that she experiences via his diary. ************************ Chancie: How exactly do you know Ginny was lying GEO? Just because they had different experiences doesn't mean that she was lying. Are you suggesting that Ginny was willing to open the CoS, or that she was aware of her actions during that time? It is quite possible to have the same thing happen to two different people and them end up with 2 very different accounts on how it happened. If you need any proof of that, just ask any woman who has given birth, every situation is different, but it still ends in a baby. ******************************************** wrote: and I have to say that the anti-HH essay had the > strongest arguments. Harry certainly loves Hermione like a friend > and would give his life to save her, but his reactions to her do not > indicate any boyfriend-girlfriend type interest on his part at all. GEO: Yes, but a lot of the arguments for the H/Hr ship has been that the potential and opportunity for a romantic relationship is greater between the two of them because of their great friendship as many have acknowledged and a certain lack of chemistry and attraction in my opinion certainly doesn't nullify or sink the H/Hr ship. **************************** Chancie: Is it also your opinion that relationships don't require chemistry? I must admit that is a very odd position to take. Please explain. I still would like to hear your thoughts on the fact that JKR was asked "Will Harry and Hermione *****EVER***** have a date?" she said NO, but that she won't answer for anyone else. You've said before that she was talking about GoF, but the word EVER in my opinion is An indefinite thing. Jo may be misleading with her answers at times, But are you suggesting that she would out and out lie? I don't think she would, especially since she knows we'll find out one way or the other later on, and then she'd be forced to deal with all the Ron/Hermione Shippers who would want to tell her off for giving them false hope. Besides she's said she wasn't going to answer questions before, why didn't she apply that to this question if she was trying to hide something. I think it is VERY clear that Harry and Hermione will NEVER EVER end up together. Chancie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From caseylane at wideopenwest.com Thu Apr 21 16:43:40 2005 From: caseylane at wideopenwest.com (Casey) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:43:40 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127900 Phoenixgod2000: > What I don't understand is the appeal in Hermione or people like > them. Does she ever laugh or joke? Is she ever just a girl instead > of crusader? Is she ever just content to spend time with her friends > without trying to convince them of something? Does she ever have any > *fun*? Her heart is in the right place all the time but I cannot > understand why anyone would subject themselves to a relationship > with her. Which is why I am a R/Hr shipper (when I'm not slashing that is.) Ron needs some maturity and Hermione needs to learn how to have fun, I think it's a match made in heaven. From the first book I shipped them and still do. Whe I first joined this list and saw that there were H/Hr shippers I asked my daughter (23) who she thought would end up with who, and she said R/Hr without a second's hesitation. When I told her that there were people that believed it would be H/Hr she was really surprised, the idea had never even occured to her, and she still didn't see it. But then again neither did I. I do know that when (not if) R/Hr do kiss I'll probably squee like the biggest fangirl ever. Casey From chnc1024 at AOL.COM Thu Apr 21 16:44:47 2005 From: chnc1024 at AOL.COM (chnc1024 at AOL.COM) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 12:44:47 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127901 SSSusan: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127902 Julie: > Questions I have: > 1. Are we sure LV is the one the prophecy is about? This may seem > like a given, but I try to recognize an assumptions, even if it is a > fairly likely one. (I do not have my book with me, and this may be > stated specifically in canon. I can't remember. It is possible that > all in the Wizarding World also made the assumption that it was LV > without him being named specifically.) > 2. If Neville also was considered as "the one" prior to that night at > GH, were the Longbottoms protected by the Fidelius Charm as well as > the Potters? > a. If not, why not? > b. If so, who was their Secret Keeper and why were they betrayed? Kemper's answers: 1. The prophecy is about the Dark Lord. I think in this era, the time when these books take place, the Dark Lord is LV. I think there have been other Dark Lords though out the ages. All part of the Dark Order. Is the Dark Lord a spirit of evil that just happens to reside in LV? Or is the Dark Lord a name one dons on when feeling especially evil? Or is the Dark Lord something else? 2. I think that Dumbledore would have encouraged the Longbottom's to use the Fidelius Charm. a. NA b. I think without any canon support that the Secret Keeper would be Neville's Gram. She, or whoever the SK was, didn't betray the Longbottoms. LV had been out of the picture for some time and witches and wizards everywhere were letting down there guard. It is then that Crouch Jr. and the Lestrange's go after the Longbottom's. -Kemper From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 17:22:51 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:22:51 -0000 Subject: HBP Disappointments = Anti-Predictions = HBP Contest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127903 My predictions for HBP: Remus Lupin will unofficially take the role of Harry's guardian (well, Sirius wasn't all that official either with that Azkaban business). Harry will visit Fred & George's shop at 93 Diagon Alley Harry will inherit Sirius or at least find that he's been entitled to use vault 711 all the time. About Half Blood Prince - we'll find whether it's a person or a potion/drink/food - or BOTH. We will find out the twelve uses of Dragon's Blood (the 12th is Oven Cleaner - what about the other eleven?) Harry's going to be very angry - particularly after Ron's birthday at March - his both best friends being of age and thus being allowed to do things he is not... I'll be waiting for that encounter! We'll be seeing more of Neville and Luna. I hope we'll properly meet Aberforth Dumbledore, and find out whether he can read or not. That comment from Albus REALLY got me curious. In fact, it made Aberforth VERY interesting, even if we only get few odd comments and a brief encounter of him as a bartender (of course, Harry doesn't know his name yet, but...) Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 17:58:04 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:58:04 -0000 Subject: Next DADA teacher (was: Re: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127904 > Sophierom: Surely Dumbledore has to > have learned by now that he has to find an absolutely trustworthy DADA > professor? He's had two very bad years of DADA professors ... and now > LV is back at full strength. Connecting this post to the thread about > HBP predictions and potential disappointments, I'll be disappointed if > the new DADA professor is a fraud or a danger. Dumbledore would be > better off teaching the subject himself if he can't find anyone he > trusts. Finwitch: Well, if Dumbledore DOES choose someone he absolutely trusts... well, remember that both Remus Lupin and Alastor Moody he chose WERE somewhat trustworthy it's just that Moody was replaced by an impostor. And I'd say Albus IS concerned about either finding a DADA teacher he trusts or none at all since he was unable to find one for Harry's fifth year (so the Ministry put Umbridge in). So - yes, he *could* teach himself. He could even be desperate enough to grant the job to his brother... even when he doesn't know if Aberforth is literate! You don't need books for constant vigilance, after all - not against a Boggart (Hermione *failed* that test), not Patronus against a Dementor. Not that some books wouldn't be helpful, but it's not necessary. Students CAN read up for themselves, right? (Much better approach than that of Umbridge, isn't it?) Of course, the new DADA professor could be Felix Felicis or some new person we haven't heard of yet... Finwitch From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 09:03:43 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 09:03:43 -0000 Subject: Ruminations on "THE" Veil - a Speculative History In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127905 bboyminn: I picture the archway as very old, weathered and worn, and much like a grand stone arch over the doorway into a mansion, castle, or catherderal. Chys: Have you read 'The Black Unicorn' or it's sequel, 'The Gold Unicorn' I think by Tanith Lee? There's a great old broken archway by the sea, and only a sorceress girl is able to repair it. She had found this unicorn, which led her there and when she does repair it, she returns the unicorn to it's world, which is perfect eden whereas her world is a place of desert and natural destruction. The veil, in your description, really reminds me of this as well. It seemed to lead to a parallel word, where nothing dies, and lions lay with sheep. The girl had found the Unicorn as a pile of bones in the sand and with strange magic, she had repaired it and brought it back to life...only for it to lead her to the veil, which she crossed through and decided against remaining within, it was too perfect an unnatural place. It's strange that the veil reminds me of this, but in comparison, would the world behind the DOM's Veil be the perfect eden, or the hell? Chys From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 21:04:18 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:04:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050421210419.87713.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127906 > SSSusan: > > Lupin chose to *resign* once the news "slipped" that he was a > werewolf, because he understood that parents would not want > somebody like him teaching their children. > > .... So, technically, it's possible that, had Lupin not resigned, > DD would have put his foot down. > > What do people think? Would DD have done, had Lupin not > volunteered to go? Fer sure he would have. The deal was that Lupin was to take his wolfsbane potion as needed and the night before he didn't. He was in werewolf form running around the grounds and could have injured or killed anyone he found. By resigning Lupin had the option of keeping some control over the situation, and avoiding having "fired" on his record. Harry doesn't understand this because he likes Lupin and can emphathize with his situation, but Dumbledore doesn't have the luxury of youth and has to act like a boss. It's interesting that two years later he doesn't offer DADA to either Snape or Lupin over Umbridge. This suggests to me that Lupin might have some way to go before he's completely in Dumbledore's good books again. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 21:27:32 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:27:32 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: <20050421210419.87713.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127907 SSSusan: What do people think? Would DD have done, had Lupin not volunteered to go? Alla: Based on the fact that some teachers that Dumbledore employs can be called incompetent ( Trelawney) and some can be called dangerous ( Snape) - that IS my opinion and my opinion only, I want to say that Dumbledore would not have fired Remus, but he may ahve had no choice , if the letters from the parents indeed started to arrive. Of course we can just speculate on this one. Magda: Harry doesn't understand this because he likes Lupin and can emphathize with his situation, but Dumbledore doesn't have the luxury of youth and has to act like a boss. It's interesting that two years later he doesn't offer DADA to either Snape or Lupin over Umbridge. This suggests to me that Lupin might have some way to go before he's completely in Dumbledore's good books again. Alla: I don't have OOP with me right now, so I can be very wrong, but was not the act against werewolves employment already in effect at the beginning of fifth year? If it is correct , then even if Dumbledore REALLY wanted to offer Remus the position, he would have simply forbidden by the Ministry now. JMO, Alla. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 21:37:30 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:37:30 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: <20050421210419.87713.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127908 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: He was in werewolf form running around the grounds and could have injured or killed anyone he found. (Snip) Dumbledore doesn't have the luxury of youth and has to act like a boss. (snip) It's interesting that two years later he doesn't offer DADA to either Snape or Lupin over Umbridge. This suggests to me that Lupin might have some way to go before he's completely in Dumbledore's good books again. Tonks: Yes, I think that DD would have suggested to Lupin to do the right thing, if he hadn't resigned on his own. He has to protect the students on the one hand. On the other hand, I think DD would have given Lupin a second chance if it were not for the bad press. Not that DD cares about bad press, I don't mean that. DD cares about the students, and the peace of mind of the parents. He also cares about Lupin and forgives him, I am sure. So on that last point I disagree with Magda, I don't think that Lupin is out of DD's grace. DD is a practical man, not a judgmental man. Tonks_op From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 21:48:45 2005 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:48:45 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: <1c8.27388f5c.2f992d49@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127909 GEO wrote:: If I recall she cheered him up by giving him information that turned out to be false and misleading so in the end listening to Ginny really didn't turn out to be his benefit considering his possession by Voldemort was quite different than that she experiences via his diary. Chancie replied: How exactly do you know Ginny was lying GEO? Just because they had different experiences doesn't mean that she was lying. Are you suggesting that Ginny was willing to open the CoS, or that she was aware of her actions during that time? It is quite possible to have the same thing happen to two different people and them end up with 2 very different accounts on how it happened. If you need any proof of that, just ask any woman who has given birth, every situation is different, but it still ends in a baby. **Marcela now: I believe that Chancie misunderstood/misread GEO's statement... GEO never said that Ginny lied to Harry. He said that she gave him information that turned out to be false and misleading. Which was true, her possession experience with Diary!Riddle was very different from Harry's possession from VoldyII. -----o------- Chancie wrote: I still would like to hear your thoughts on the fact that JKR was asked "Will Harry and Hermione *****EVER***** have a date?" she said NO, but that she won't answer for anyone else. You've said before that she was talking about GoF, but the word EVER in my opinion is An indefinite thing. Jo may be misleading with her answers at times, But are you suggesting that she would out and out lie? I don't think she would, especially since she knows we'll find out one way or the other later on, and then she'd be forced to deal with all the Ron/Hermione Shippers who would want to tell her off for giving them false hope. Besides she's said she wasn't going to answer questions before, why didn't she apply that to this question if she was trying to hide something. I think it is VERY clear that Harry and Hermione will NEVER EVER end up together. Marcela now: Sorry for meddling here, but I believe that -yet again- there is some misunderstanding of the English language here... This is the quote you're talking about: Transcript of National Press Club author's luncheon, NPR Radio, October 20, 1999 Transcript courtesy of Hogwarts Library; Transcribed by Loriba; special thanks to Earwax and Troels Forchhammer for proofreading. "...Sean Bullard: Hello everyone! May I have your attention for a moment please? Hi, I'm Sean Bullard. I am chairman of the book and author committee here at the National Press Club. Following custom, I will introduce our guest. **She will then offer us some magical insight into her new book, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. And then I would like to encourage those of you who have questions to point ... print them on the index cards provided at each table and then pass them forward.** Following questions, I will wrap up the event promptly, so that our guest has time to sign books ... and I believe also to catch a plane. Sean Bullard: Um, is there anything that you'd wanna add? J.K. Rowling: No, I'll take one more question because they didn't really get an answer to that. Sean Bullard: Very good. J.K. Rowlingquestion22: Nah ... don't like that one. Oh I like this one: "Do Harry and Hermione have a date?" No! They're, they're very platonic friends. But I won't answer for anyone else, nudge, nudge, wink, wink. ..." (**are mine) Soooo, if you read carefully, this interview was in 1999, Jo was giving it because of her next book "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" and was going to answer to question posted to her about that book... Next, the written question she personally picked from the public was phrased in the Simple Present Tense "Do Harry and Hermione have a date?". Her answer was in present too, and her indication of anyone else might be Viktor and Cho, after all, she was focusing on Harry and Hermione and they did date in her next two books. I can understand that shipping and JKR's quotes don't mix well, especially when interpretation comes into play. In the end what matters in real canon, not quotes, IMO. Nevertheless, it would be more helpful to quote those interviews accurately, and let readers in this site make their own interpretations. Marcela From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 21:53:26 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:53:26 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127910 Tonks: Yes, I think that DD would have suggested to Lupin to do the right thing, if he hadn't resigned on his own. He has to protect the students on the one hand. On the other hand, I think DD would have given Lupin a second chance if it were not for the bad press. Not that DD cares about bad press, I don't mean that. DD cares about the students, and the peace of mind of the parents. He also cares about Lupin and forgives him, I am sure. So on that last point I disagree with Magda, I don't think that Lupin is out of DD's grace. DD is a practical man, not a judgmental man. Alla: That is the thing though. Would it have been the RIGHT thing if Lupin would have resigned? Sure, it was VERY dangerous for him to run around without Wolfsbane, but as someone suggested - the circumstances were SO very far from ordinary and so very not likely to be repeated again. I think that now Lupin is unlikely to forget about the Wolfsbane ever in his life, although again as I mentioned earlier if you have to take medication all your life, you ARE likely to forget about it sometimes under far less stressful circumstances, IMO. Dumbledore and Hogwarts lost the best defense teacher they had in years and not only Harry thinks that Lupin is a good teacher. JMO, Alla. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 21:54:27 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 21:54:27 -0000 Subject: ... muggle-borns... off the radar? St. Brutus Academy of Naughty Boys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127911 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > > > a_svirn wrote: > > M.b. it was Dudley who spread the St.Brutus' rumours? After all it > > was children who were terrified. > > Ginger again: > > I have to admit ignorance as to what M.b. means. Sorry about that. > > As to Dudley spreading the rumours, you may well be right. We only > know Vernon told Marge that. We assume he would have told the > neighbours, had they asked. > > Somehow from the way it was worded "they had been warned...(he was) a > hardened houligan" struck me as though the parents were doing the > warning. I can't imagine Dudley saying "Watch out for my cousin. > He's a hardened houligan." I can more see him saying "Watch out for > my mad cousin. He'll suck out your eyeballs as you sleep." Or > something like that. > > That's just the way I read it. It could be either, or a little of > both. Or Petunia. I can just hear her saying "hardened houligan." > > Ginger, glad it's Thursday a_svirn: m.b. meant maybe. I think too it was probably something of both. But I can't imagine Vernon discussing his nephew with his neighbours. He would probably try to avoid the subject altogether. As for Dudley I believe that after the lifetime of bulling his crazy cousin he would have to come up with some excuse as to why he suddenly stopped. He couldn't very well tell his cronies about magic, so he probably resorted to the school for young delinquent's fiction. Probably adding for a good measure that Potter had come back even nuttier than usual and it safer to leave him alone. a_svirn From elfundeb at gmail.com Thu Apr 21 22:03:38 2005 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 18:03:38 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Prophecy, Potters, Longbottoms, and the Fidelius Charm In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a0504211503524a5380@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127912 Julie: > Questions I have: > 2. If Neville also was considered as "the one" prior to that night at > GH, were the Longbottoms protected by the Fidelius Charm as well as > the Potters? > a. If not, why not? > b. If so, who was their Secret Keeper and why were they betrayed? I've come to the conclusion that the Longbottoms may not have had a Secret Keeper. According to Fudge in POA, Dumbledore became aware that Voldemort was after the Potters. Dumbledore also tells Harry in OOP ch. 37 that Voldemort chose to go after Harry. Thus, it's possible that the reason the Secret Keeper was put in place was solely because of that knowledge. It would have been a prudent precaution to send the Longbottoms into hiding as well, especially if it was only then that Dumbledore made the discovery that Voldemort knew about the prophecy. (I don't get the sense that they knew at the time that the Hogs Head eavesdropper was a Voldy spy.) Furthermore, it is a hardship to go into hiding, and as the Longbottoms were Aurors their failure to show up at work might have made Voldemort's ministry spies sit up and take notice (and perhaps suspect leaks in their own security). Dropping out of sight is always easier for the idle [outwardly, anyway] rich . . . . If the Longbottoms did go into hiding, though, there are many possible candidates for Secret Keeper among Order members. Presumably, if there was a secret keeper, after Voldemort fell, when everyone felt safe, the charm would have been removed. Thus, their attack did not result from another double-crossing Secret Keeper. This last is total speculation, but I think the Longbottoms were attacked because Ludo Bagman found out that Crouch had sent Frank to find out where Vapormort was hiding, and it was one of those bits of information he passed on to Rookwood, who informed the loyal Lestranges, who recruited Barty Jr. (because the Crouches undoubtedly socialized with the Longbottoms, as Frank was a popular and up-and-coming Auror) to gain access to chez Longbottom. The basis for this last is that Barty Jr claimed to be innocent, which is plausible if he didn't know why they were visiting the Longbottoms and if he left the torturing to Bellatrix. We also know that the Lestranges don't know about the prophecy, which makes this plausible. I'm still convinced, however, that there's a secret about Frank which is connected with the attack. Perhaps he had been playing the double agent game, too, but revealed himself on the night of the torture. Debbie who doesn't think there's a secret about Alice because of the way Dumbledore explained the attack to Harry in GoF From tonks_op at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 22:11:33 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 22:11:33 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127913 felix felicis : lucky, fortunate, happy. Do we know that this is going to be a person? Maybe it is a new spell. I looked up Felicis in an online Latin Dictonary and up poped the whole phrase!! Much to my shock. Maybe it is not a person?? I have been researching because I was going to predict, based on something else I discoved earlier that Felix Felicis being a person was going to be an evil person. I base this on the fact that someone named Felix was the anti-pope when there were two popes. But now I am not sure that it is even a person. What do people think?? Tonks_op From templar1112002 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 23:08:05 2005 From: templar1112002 at yahoo.com (templar1112002) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 23:08:05 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127914 phoenixgod2000 wrote: But when Fleur kisses Harry and thanks him? Nothing. He didn't feel anything. That shows that he's not just after the prettiest girl in any given room. Marcela now: Actually, Harry felt like any 14 year old boy, and I quote: "...Fleur bent down, kissed Harry twice on each cheek (he felt his fave burn and wouldn't have been surprised if steam was coming out of his ears again) ..."GoF page 506, Schol.h/c. After this refreshening of canon text, I wonder what does that show to you now... -----o----- phoenixgod2000 wrote: And I would disagree with you that it was Hermione alone who did that alone. And even if she did, being able to help someone doesn't indicate potential romance. There have been plenty of dark times in my life that my friends have helped me out of and I have helped them in turn. doesn't mean any of us are running off together. Hermione is one of harry's friends and she showed it by being one of the people to help him out of his rut. **Marcela now: There is room for disagreement, yes. But the canon facts are that after one day and a half, Harry had ostracized himself from the Weasleys, Sirius and rest of Order members (in his room or the drawing room), had cooped himself up in Beaky's room and had been feeling like he was carrying a disease (the beginnings of depression, I'd say). Nobody succeeded (not that they tried hard) in taking him out of this mood, despite some of them (Ron, the twins, Ginny and even perhaps DD through Phineas) knowing the cause of this behaviour: his overhearing Moody's comment of perhaps having been possessed... Why would Jo make Hermione come to his rescue? Especially after she (Jo) had created a different scenario for Hermione's holiday? There is authorial intent here, but of course, this interpretation is up for grabs. -------o------- phoenixgod2000 wrote: He lies to her when she asks for his help with spew in OOTP. He lies to her when she asks if he's started Occulomency training again. **Marcela now: Of all the few examples you could have given for Harry lying to Hermione, I'm afraid that this is not a good one, as Harry didn't lie to her when she asked him to knit socks (BTW, did you ask yourself about this action of Hermione's and its possible implications?). Harry was lucky enough to have a perfect excuse: he did have loads of homework and was running behind, wasn't he? I'd like to point out that there is a change in the form of Harry's lying to Hermione. In PoA, he didn't have any problems in hiding things from her, he felt a bit guilty for not telling her but went ahead with his escapade to Hogsmeade. In GoF, "...'Oh, I - I reckon I've got a pretty good idea what it's about now,' Harry lied./'Have you really?' said Hermione, looking impressed. 'Well done!'/Harry's insides gave a guilty squirm, but he ignored them...." GoF page 443. In OoTP, "...He imagined trying to conceal from Hermione that he had received T's in all his OWLs and immediately resolved to work harder from now on. ..." page 311 Schol.ed.h/c. Then there's another scene in which he cannot look at Hermione in the eye when he lied to her. As a contrast, his pattern for lying to Ron has not changed much, other than perhaps in OoTP he lied to him a bit more maliciously in one occasion: when Ron told Hermione he had heard Harry muttering 'a bit farther' while sleeping, and Harry lashed out with the Quidditch lie of Ron not reaching 'a bit farther' to save a goal (when it had been a Door dream in the end). -----o------- phoenixgod2000 wrote: He hates spending time with her alone when he and ron are fighting in GoF. Something tells me that he didn't exactly share that little fact with her (I believe) that he lies to her when he thinks Ron is right during the scabbers fiasco. **Marcela: Actually, according to canon, Harry doesn't *hate* to spend time with Hermione. "...Harry liked Hermione very much, but she just wasn't the same as Ron. There was much less laughter and a lot more hanging aroung in the library when Hermione was your best friend. Harry still hadn't mastered Summoning Charms, he seemed to have developed something of a block about them, and Hermione insisted that learning the theory would help. The consequently spent a lot of time poring over books during their lunchtimes. ..." GoF pages 316/7. In the Second Task chapter: "...He sat with Hermione and Ron in the library as the sun set outside, tearing feverishly through page after page of spells, hidden from one another by the massive piles of books..."page 485. So, I'd say that Harry was just missing Ron's company, not that he hated to be with Hermione... besides, they were in the library because of "his" problem with Summoning Charms. When Ron was back with them, Harry still had to visit the library, even missing lunch on some occasions... ------o------- phoenixgod2000 wrote: What I don't understand is the appeal in Hermione or people like them. Does she ever laught at a joke? Is she ever just a girl instead of crusader? Is she ever just content to spend time with her friends without trying to convince them of something? Does she ever have any *fun*? Her heart is in the right place all the time but I cannot understand why anyone would subject themselves to a relationship with her. **Marcela now: Perhaps you have been biased by your experiences with those girls, but I believe that the canon Hermione is not exactly as the one you're portraying. Hermione is the one that is more serious and more tight about what is right and proper. Despite this, we see her often laughing and smiling. As a matter of fact, her smile is the one that is most mentioned in the books, according to the five books: Whose smile caught Harry's eye? Artemis (author of this) did the search with following words in mind: smile, beam brightly, happily, cheerfully, pleased, grin, laugh, amused, bemused. >From the search results, she collected all the quotes which described happy expressions but not the expressions caused by something hillarious. The final results are: -----------------OOTP------GOF------POA------COS------PS------total Hermione -------- 23--------20--------4-------6--------1--------54 Harry------------ 12---------8--------5-------6--------6--------37 Ron-------------- 11---------6--------4-------5--------1--------27 Cho-------------- 12---------1--------1-------------------------14 Ginny------------- 3---------3--------0-------0--------0---------6 Luna-------------- 4---------------------------------------------4 If Harry (or Jo) noticed (or wrote about) Hermione's smile more often that even Ron's, then I'd say that there's something behind this... Marcela From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 00:01:24 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050422000124.26189.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127915 > Alla: > > That is the thing though. Would it have been the RIGHT thing if > Lupin would have resigned? Sure, it was VERY dangerous for him to > run > around without Wolfsbane, but as someone suggested - the > circumstances were SO very far from ordinary and so very not likely > to be repeated again. No, THAT particular situation wouldn't crop up again but another stressful situation definitely would and Dumbledore can't risk the lives of students and townspeople on that chance. Under stress, Lupin forgot about the potion. And now that I think about it, not only Umbridge got the DADA job over Lupin, so did Lockhart. Hmmm.... Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From jmrazo at hotmail.com Fri Apr 22 00:11:42 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:11:42 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127916 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "templar1112002" wrote: > > phoenixgod2000 wrote: But when Fleur kisses Harry and thanks > him? Nothing. He didn't feel anything. That shows that he's not just > after the prettiest girl in any given room. > > Marcela now: Actually, Harry felt like any 14 year old boy, and I > quote: "...Fleur bent down, kissed Harry twice on each cheek (he > felt his fave burn and wouldn't have been surprised if steam was > coming out of his ears again) ..."GoF page 506, Schol.h/c. > > After this refreshening of canon text, I wonder what does that show > to you now... > Marcela I stand corrected. Shows you how long it's been since I've read GoF:) Still, I think the point stands that Harry, attracted as he was to Fleur, had something he could have used as an in with her, and still didn't pursue her when he could have shows that he was not just after a girl who was pretty. I still say that he liked Cho for Cho and not just because she was really pretty--although I'm sure that does help. You do bring up some interesting points, especially about the smiling ratio. I still say that H/Hr is the most unlikely but theoretically possible ship in the book. When the author calls them platonic friends that seems to me to be pretty much the kiss of death when it comes to shipping them. phoenixgod2000 From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 00:20:40 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:20:40 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down /Lupin and DADA In-Reply-To: <20050422000124.26189.qmail@web53108.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127917 Magda: And now that I think about it, not only Umbridge got the DADA job over Lupin, so did Lockhart. Hmmm.... Alla: My memory could be fuzzy, but I seem to remember Hagrid saying that Lockhart was the ONLY candidate for the job. Could it mean that Lupin did not apply for the job in their second year? Don't forget that Lupin still has to tell us about what he was doing during those twelve years. He could have been busy with some project for the Order, for example. Just my opinion, Alla From tinglinger at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 00:36:34 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:36:34 -0000 Subject: Prophecy, Potters, Longbottoms, and the Fidelius Charm In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a0504211503524a5380@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127918 elfundeb I've come to the conclusion that the Longbottoms may not have had a Secret Keeper. According to Fudge in POA, Dumbledore became aware that Voldemort was after the Potters. Dumbledore also tells Harry in OOP ch. 37 that Voldemort chose to go after Harry. Thus, it's possible that the reason the Secret Keeper was put in place was solely because of that knowledge. If the Longbottoms did go into hiding, though, there are many possible candidates for Secret Keeper among Order members. Presumably, if there was a secret keeper, after Voldemort fell, when everyone felt safe, the charm would have been removed. Thus, their attack did not result from another double-crossing Secret Keeper. tinglinger I still think that the little pieces of paper that were used to communicate the hiding place by the Secret Keeper are key to what haappened both to the Longbottoms and the Potters. This is why Alice saves the Droobles gum wrappers and gives them to Neville for safekeeping or disposal. I contend that someone was very careless with the papers and resulted in the damage wrought..... I expand on this theory in my yahoogroup "potterplots" if you are interested........ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots elfundeb This last is total speculation, but I think the Longbottoms were attacked because Ludo Bagman found out that Crouch had sent Frank to find out where Vapormort was hiding, and it was one of those bits of information he passed on to Rookwood, who informed the loyal Lestranges, who recruited Barty Jr. (because the Crouches undoubtedly socialized with the Longbottoms, as Frank was a popular and up-and-coming Auror) to gain access to chez Longbottom. The basis for this last is that Barty Jr claimed to be innocent, which is plausible if he didn't know why they were visiting the Longbottoms and if he left the torturing to Bellatrix. We also know that the Lestranges don't know about the prophecy, which makes this plausible. I'm still convinced, however, that there's a secret about Frank which is connected with the attack. Perhaps he had been playing the double agent game, too, but revealed himself on the night of the torture. who doesn't think there's a secret about Alice because of the way Dumbledore explained the attack to Harry in GoF. tinglinger Ludo Bagman is not an innocent by any means, and if he isn't baked into a pie by the goblins he ripped off, the dark lord will get him. Not much has been said about Frank Longbottom at this point, so anything is possible. From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 22 01:33:46 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 01:33:46 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127919 SSSusan sssaid: >What do people think? Would DD have done, had Lupin not volunteered >to go? You're right, Dumbledore didn't (that we know of), but I think he would have. Fond though he may be of Lupin, and excellent teacher that he is, this isn't about Lupin being known as a werewolf -- it's about the safety of the students, and Lupin has just proved himself unreliable. He can't just keep giving Lupin chances until the one where he bites or kills a student, and *then* say "Okay, no more Mr. Nice Wizard!" Janet Anderson From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 22 01:44:03 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 01:44:03 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: HBP Disappointments = Anti-Predictions = HBP Contest In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127920 Finwitch suggests: >Harry's going to be very angry - particularly after Ron's birthday at >March - his both best friends being of age and thus being allowed to >do things he is not... I'll be waiting for that encounter! I do not agree. Ron and Hermione, along with everyone else in his year, got to go to Hogsmeade more than once when Harry could not. He wasn't angry, just disappointed. In this case, unlike Hogsmeade, there are undoubtedly others in his year who also won't be of age. He and Ron will spend most of the year underage, and after Ron's birthday, it'll only be a few months. Janet Anderson From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 02:44:24 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 02:44:24 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127921 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > felix felicis : lucky, fortunate, happy. > > Do we know that this is going to be a person? Maybe it is a new spell. I looked up Felicis in an online Latin Dictonary and up poped the whole phrase!! Much to my shock. Maybe it is not a person?? > > I have been researching because I was going to predict, based on > something else I discoved earlier that Felix Felicis being a person was going to be an evil person. I base this on the fact that someone named Felix was the anti-pope when there were two popes. But now I am not sure that it is even a person. What do people think?? > > Tonks_op The reason that the whole phrase popped up is that Latin adjectives are listed in dictionaries and glossaries by their first two principal parts (the nominative and genitive forms), which indicate which declension they belong to. "Felix, felicis" means "happy" (or "lucky"), "of the happy" (or "of the lucky"), and the formation of the genitive (possessive) shows that it's a third declension adjective. (My Latin is extremely rusty--high school was decades ago when I was a different person altogether--so I may have some details wrong. Or perhaps someone else who took Latin more recently can explain it more clearly. My point is that the words "felix, felicis" belong together in somewhat the same way that "good, better, best" belong together, except that "felicis" is the genitive rather than the comparative and superlative like "better" and "best." Oh. Yeah. That cleared *that* up! Anyway, I think that JKR just liked the sound of the two forms together and that they are a person's name. My money is on Felix Felicis as the DADA instructor and/or the HBP. I doubt very much that he'll be evil. JKR's character names generally fit the character and Felix Felicis would be ironically unsuitable for an evil character. In fact, he could be the fortunate person who ends the jinx on the DADA position (which unfortunately, IMO, would make the job unavailable as a reward for Snape's services to the school and the Order unless Felix voluntarily steps down at the end of Book 6 or 7). FWIW, the anti-popes weren't necessarily evil. They were simply rivals of the Roman popes elected because the reigning pope was considered corrupt or incompetent. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 03:10:00 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 03:10:00 -0000 Subject: Prophecy, Potters, Longbottoms, and the Fidelius Charm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127922 elfundeb wrote: > This last is total speculation, but I think the Longbottoms were > attacked because Ludo Bagman found out that Crouch had sent Frank to > find out where Vapormort was hiding, and it was one of those bits of > information he passed on to Rookwood, who informed the loyal > Lestranges, who recruited Barty Jr. (because the Crouches undoubtedly socialized with the Longbottoms, as Frank was a popular and up-and-coming Auror) to gain access to chez Longbottom. The basis for this last is that Barty Jr claimed to be innocent, which is plausible if he didn't know why they were visiting the Longbottoms and if he left the torturing to Bellatrix. > tinglinger responded: > Ludo Bagman is not an innocent by any means, and if he isn't baked > into a pie by the goblins he ripped off, the dark lord will get him. > Not much has been said about Frank Longbottom at this point, so > anything is possible. Carol responds: But Barty Jr. isn't innocent, either. If he wasn't a Death Eater when he was sent to Azkaban, how, when, and where did he learn the Unforgiveable Curses he cast so often and easily at Hogwarts, not to mention the Morsmordre he cast at the QWC, and why would Voldemort consider him his most loyal servant (aside from the imprisoned Lestranges) if he hadn't loyally served him as a DE before he was imprisoned? I firmly believe that Barty was not only present when the Longbottoms were tortured, he had a hand in it. Probably all four DEs (the three Lestranges and Barty) were casting simultaneous Crucios--maybe two people per Longbottom. I know I can't prove any of this, but IMO there's no other explanation for Barty's fanatical devotion to LV in GoF, or for his resentment of "Death Eaters who walked free." Interesting speculation about Bagman's role, elfundeb! Carol From bboyminn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 05:50:42 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 05:50:42 -0000 Subject: HBP ... Anti-Predictions - Apparation & Age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127923 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Janet Anderson" wrote: > Finwitch suggests: > > > Harry's going to be very angry - particularly after Ron's birthday > > at March - his both best friends being of age and thus being > > allowed to do things he is not... > Janet: > > I do not agree. Ron and Hermione, ... got to go to Hogsmeade ... > when Harry could not. He wasn't angry, just disappointed. In this > case, ...others in his year who also won't be of age. Ron will > spend most of the year underage, ... > > > Janet Anderson bboyminn: I see Harry as being angry but only in a very light and general sense; though annoyed is probably much close to it than angry. Also, as Janet implied, Ron won't be of-age until near the end of the school year. Further none of them have had any training in Apparation, which we are told is a difficult and dangerous thing to do. I suspect that training will come during the next (book 6) school year. Also, don't forget that even when Hermione and Ron are of-age, they will still be at Hogwarts which you can't Apparate out of, and even if they could, it would be against the rules, and there really isn't any place to Apparate to. I suspect they will all take their Apparation training during 6th years, so that they can all then take the test during the summer between their 6th and 7th year. As a side note, because I need it for a story; I'm desperately hoping the Apparation will indeed be a class they will all take during year 6. JKR has said that the farther you Apparate the more difficult and dangerous it becomes. I think she said something to the effect that only the most talented and powerful wizard would dare attempt to Apparate across a continent. Keeping in mind that she is likely referring to the European continent. So, I am extremely eager to know the exact details of the limits of Apparation, and the details of how it's done and what it feels like. (As well as more details about Floo and Portkey limits.) I've tentatively set the common safe Apparation limit at about 500km (310 miles) which would mean that it would take two 'hops' for all but the most talented wizards to get from Hogwarts/Hogsmead to London which I suspect is between 400 and 500 miles. Trivia: using rougly 300 mile 'hops' it is possible to go from London to New York; I've worked it all out on maps. It's one of the things that I am most eagerly waiting to find out about in the next books. Not sure what that's worth, but there it is. Steve/bboyminn From imamommy at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 22 06:34:06 2005 From: imamommy at sbcglobal.net (elady25) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 06:34:06 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127924 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: snip > What I don't understand is the appeal in Hermione or people like > them. Does she ever laugh or joke? Is she ever just a girl instead > of crusader? Is she ever just content to spend time with her friends > without trying to convince them of something? Does she ever have any > *fun*? Her heart is in the right place all the time but I cannot > understand why anyone would subject themselves to a relationship > with her. imamommy: Ah, it appears we are at an impass. I absolutely love Hermione. She knows who she is and what she likes to do. No fun, you say? But to Hermione, SPEW is fun. Knitting elf hats is fun. Researching items of interest is fun, for Hermione. IMO, Hermione enjoys her passionate academic pursuits as much as the boys enjoy quidditch. Signs show that she has developed a friendship with Ginny, and she is usually willing to help Harry in any way, even to a fault. I would love to know ten such dedicated, mature friends who are so self-assured. Ron, on the other hand, is a vacuuous clod. It's almost painful to read his scenes. He is very loyal to Harry, and they have fun together, but Ron hasn't had a lot of brilliant moments since the chess game. He drove me bonkers in OOP. He so often seemed only there to ask the obvious audience questions, so Hermione could provide the answers. So I think if he and Hermione get together, she is definitely going to be dating beneath her level. Urrgh! Hermione reminds me of myself, and if I were in a relationship with Ron, I would, well, not be. Just my subjective opinion. imamommy From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Apr 22 06:45:32 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 06:45:32 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127925 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: > (My Latin is extremely rusty--high school was decades ago when I was a > different person altogether--so I may have some details wrong. Or > perhaps someone else who took Latin more recently can explain it more > clearly. My point is that the words "felix, felicis" belong together > in somewhat the same way that "good, better, best" belong together, > except that "felicis" is the genitive rather than the comparative and > superlative like "better" and "best." Oh. Yeah. That cleared *that* up! > Geoff: A better description might be that a genitive is the possessive form. For example, the genitive in english of "boy" is "boy's" and in German "the house" is "das Haus" and the genitive "des Hauses". So "felix felicis" could be translated as a name as "Lucky of the Lucky" or something similar, remembering that there is no definite or indefinite pronoun (ie "a" or "the") in Latin. Keep your Latin well polished and clear of rust! I haven't studied it seriously for more years than I dare admit but it is a marvellous language because it gives you such a great insight into grammar structure and also the meaning of so many words in other languages. What got me as a sixteen year old was having, as a set book for GCE O Level, "De Bello Gallico" which was the account of the Gallic wars written by Julius Caesar himself. Wow! From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Fri Apr 22 06:55:49 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 07:55:49 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD putting his foot down In-Reply-To: <20050421210419.87713.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20050421210419.87713.qmail@web53103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <42689FF5.9040608@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127926 Magda Grantwich wrote: > It's interesting that two years > later he doesn't offer DADA to either Snape or Lupin over Umbridge. > This suggests to me that Lupin might have some way to go before he's > completely in Dumbledore's good books again. I agree with the idea, but I don't think we can use Umbridge's assignment as a proof. Dumbledore must have had realised that the Ministry is hell-bent to get her into Hogwarts. If it wasn't throught the convenient door of DADA position, they would try to bring her in through a window, maybe organising injury to some other teacher? And even if Dumbledore wanted Lupin for the job, the last thing that Lupin needs is Ministry digging into his history, trying to proof that their candidate is better. Irene > > Magda > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin_Files/hbfile.html > > Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > From siskiou at vcem.com Fri Apr 22 07:16:07 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 00:16:07 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1256881487.20050422001607@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127927 Hi, Thursday, April 21, 2005, 11:34:06 PM, elady25 wrote: > So I think if he and Hermione get together, she is > definitely going to be dating beneath her level. Urrgh! Hermione > reminds me of myself, and if I were in a relationship with Ron, I > would, well, not be. And here lies one of the big problems, I think: you identify with Hermione and project your feelings and reasoning onto her character. But the thing is that *Joanne Rowling* is also Hermione and the author ;) So, we'll have to just go along with the way *she* envisions her feelings. Looking at the way she speaks of Hermione, she does not see her as all that self assured and mostly perfect, and she even once said something along the lines "if she'd been as annoying as Hermione as a kid, she'd have deserved drowing". This was, of course, jokingly said, but it makes me believe that we are not supposed to see Hermione as this perfect creature who wishes nothing more than to help everyone around her and should be adored by everyone. While she does want to help, her methods are not always right or pleasant, and sometimes achieve the opposite of what she wanted to (making people avoid her, and put of studying even more). I probably see Hermione and Ron as a lot more equal than you do, since I don't think Ron is a dumb clod and Hermione is not quite as highly advanced a being, imo ;) I agree that Hermione has fun studying, working on spew and knitting elf clothes, but this does not mean that other people like those things, or that Hermione can not have fun in other ways. The problem with Harry and Hermione is that Harry doesn't tell her he is not interested, and suffers through it (not with much grace) or tries avoiding/lying to get out of this kind of fun. He also doesn't try to make her try some other fun activities. It's all about Hermione helping Harry. With Ron in the mix, there are some other activities (chess, Hogsmeade, being talked out of studying every once in a while, being told straight out when something is not fun to anyone but Hermione instead of making up something, verbal sparring, getting admiration for her intellect in a backhanded, but nevertheless pleasing way). Harry and Hermione just don't seem to have the right personality traits to be a romantic couple. Harry is under a lot of pressure, and while Hermione is extremely helpful and a great friend, she is also very anxious and very insistant and bossy, and never lets Harry forget for a moment about the danger he is in. He needs a break every once in a while, but Hermione doesn't and she can't understand that others don't function the same way she does (I thought it was ironic how she psychoanalyzed Cho in detail, but can't seem to do the same with herself or her close friends). -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From DANCERWH86 at aol.com Thu Apr 21 14:40:46 2005 From: DANCERWH86 at aol.com (DANCERWH86 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:40:46 -0400 Subject: Harry's Transfer to Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <1114085946.24260.33687.m19@yahoogroups.com> References: <1114085946.24260.33687.m19@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C714973D256CC2-4A4-19E84@mblk-d18.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127928 <<<< Geoff: I think you are speaking of the US system here. In the UK, the percentage of transfers from state to independent or vice versa is very small.>>>> I was speaking US wise, but I'm talking about six people out of about 1000 that go to state school...So the percentage is also very small. I still don't feel its an issue. I don't think the amount of children that go to Hogwarts who are muggle born and in the average school system is any larger to create a stir. If not as someone said the Dursleys have a cover school I'm sure others do. And Hogwarts itself must have some system for aiding the childs need of verifying records or what have you if the need should arise. "Lindsay" ~~~~~ I once saw a forklift lift a crate of forks. And it was way too literal for me! ~Mitch Hedberg From emmy_g50 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 21 14:50:00 2005 From: emmy_g50 at hotmail.com (Emily Grace Blackstone) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 14:50:00 +0000 Subject: The Point of Hogwarts In-Reply-To: <1114056577.22465.67963.m1@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127929 Carol wrote: >"It does seem sad that they're deprived of training in music > and languages and literature" jumperkid: I would like to point out that we only see the lessons that Harry is taking. Hermione is in some lessons that are different from what Harry and Ron are taking (Arithmancy and I think Ancient Runes?) especially after third year, when the stundets are able to chose certain classes. I imagine there are other lessons that do include music or arts that we simply don't get to hear about. Now, I would argue that the arts should be a required course like Potions, but that's neither here nor there. jumperkid, new and jumping into the middle of a conversation. From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Thu Apr 21 15:00:13 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 08:00:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: DD putting his foot down -- Lupin (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050421150013.13515.qmail@web30711.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127930 SSSusan wrote: > What do people think? Would DD have done, had Lupin > not volunteered to go? I am sure that Dumbledore would have had to let Lupin go due there would be some parents who (for the wrong reasons) wouldn't want a werewolf as a teacher. But I am sure Dumbledore probably would have done it with some regret. laurie From imontero at iname.com Thu Apr 21 17:04:17 2005 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 17:04:17 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" -- Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127931 > > Luna: > > It was Ginny the one who really got to him and gave him hope. > > GEO: > If I recall she cheered him up by giving him information that > turned out to be false and misleading so in the end listening > to Ginny really didn't turn out to be his benefit considering > his possession by Voldemort was quite different than that she > experiences via his diary. Luna : Yes, Ginny was possessed by a memory, a dairy left behind by Tom M. who at that tender age was already calling himself LV and was creating pieces of Dark magic like the dairy and killing his father and his family Also, if you pay attention to how LV describes his possession of animals, and how they die after a while because the possession sucks the life out of them, you'll see how Ginny was indeed possessed and was having her life being sucked by Tom M./LV memory. I don't think Ginny's info was neither misleading nor false as she was right: based on her experience she got to the conclusion that Harry was not being possessed at that time. And that's what Harry needed to know at that specific moment. Anywhoo, this is another discussion Back to my original point. I am not discussing the quality of the information Ginny gave to Harry, it is clear that she wasn't lying to him. I was giving an example of how Hermione was unable in that situation to cheer an unhappy, miserable Harry up. She is aware of this, she wants Harry to be happy, she knows she doesn't have all the tools to make him happy so she required Ron and Ginny's support in Grimmauld Place. I love Hermione, I know she loves Harry (as a friend, so far) and she wants him to be happy and save. I just want to put into perspective this so often mentioned scene in Grimmauld Place that some people like to bring up in order to make the point on Hermione being the ? only one ? who could help Harry. This argument backfires as we see that the one actually cheering him up and getting to his heart is Ginny, not Hermione From feenyjam at msu.edu Thu Apr 21 20:36:42 2005 From: feenyjam at msu.edu (greenfirespike) Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 20:36:42 -0000 Subject: Next DADA teacher (was: Re: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127932 Sophierom said: > Surely Dumbledore has to have learned by now that he has to > find an absolutely trustworthy DADA professor? Finwitch said: > Well, remember that both Remus Lupin and Alastor Moody he chose > WERE somewhat trustworthy, it's just that Moody was replaced by > an impostor. > > Of course, the new DADA professor could be Felix Felicis or > some new person we haven't heard of yet... Greenfirespike says: Honestly, I think we will get a new DADA teacher. The trend in each novel has been to present at least one new character who will be the *new* DADA teacher. Here is a quick breakdown of the DADAs. Year 1: Quirrell (good guy taken over by a bad guy thus bad guy) Year 2: Lockheart (looser, playboy, fraud umm list goes on bad guy) Year 3: Lupin (good guy, had to leave due to threat of parental revolt) Year 4: Moody (this good guy locked up, bad guy pretending to be the good guy) Year 5: Umbridge, (good girl but mostly bad natured, and ultimately played the role of bad girl) Thus, it seems almost certain that we will have a new DADA in HBP. The better question is, will the new DADA end up on the side of good or bad (typically bad) and what must Harry learn from the DADA to prepare him for his fight with LV? Greenfirespike From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 08:55:26 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:55:26 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127933 > Carol: > > My point is that the words "felix, felicis" belong together > > in somewhat the same way that "good, better, best" belong > > together, except that "felicis" is the genitive rather than > > the comparative and superlative like "better" and "best." > Geoff: > A better description might be that a genitive is the possessive > form. > > So "felix felicis" could be translated as a name as "Lucky of > the Lucky" or something similar, remembering that there is no > definite or indefinite pronoun (ie "a" or "the") in Latin. mz_annethrope: Try this: "felix felicis" means Felix (happy, lucky) son of Felix, or more likely Felix descendent of Felix's son. Same principle as calling someone Richard Richardson, or Peter Peters, or if you want a name that retains a Latin genitive, Jacob Jacobi. mz_annethrope (hoping the elves aren't too annoyed) From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 22 14:54:21 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 14:54:21 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down /Lupin and DADA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127934 > > Magda: > And now that I think about it, not only Umbridge got the DADA job > over Lupin, so did Lockhart. Hmmm.... > > > Alla: > Don't forget that Lupin still has to tell us about what he was doing > during those twelve years. He could have been busy with some project > for the Order, for example. Potioncat: I've seen it suggested that DD hired Lupin at this particular time because Black had escaped. As an Order member he could be an extra- special pair of hands. This, of course, presumes that DD thought Black was guilty and Lupin was trustworthy. As a side note: we're told Lockhart was the only candidate; and we're told Snape applies every year. Which one isn't true? From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Fri Apr 22 12:34:37 2005 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 08:34:37 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: Intermingling of Muggle and Wizard Worlds References: Message-ID: <4268EF5D.00000C.04032@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 127935 There's been extensive discussion of what wizard children do after 7 years of wizard school and muggles being kept from knowing about the wizard world. I got to thinking late last night about nothing in particular and the thought has occurred to me that there definitely is knowingly intermingling of the two worlds. It has occurred to me that, first of all, the muggles who have children attending Hogwarts obviously know of the wizard world and I am sure some of them have told other family members. I know my family would all know. We know the Grangers have gone to Gringotts to exchange muggle money for wizard money and have shopped in the many shops in Diagon Alley. Please excuse any misspellings. Also, I have a feeling that there is business done between the wizard merchants and muggle merchants, mostly for wizard manufacturing materials. The muggles may not know of the business but my instincts tell me that wizard merchants get some of their materials from muggles. We know that various wizards and witches live among muggles, i.e. Mrs. Figg. Also, all of the Dursleys definitely know of the wizard world even though they would rather not. I hope this makes sense to you all. It's early and I'm functioning on about 3 hrs sleep and it's going to be a long day. Donna From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 22 15:14:42 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:14:42 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127936 > Carol: snip My point is that the words "felix, felicis" belong together > > in somewhat the same way that "good, better, best" belong together,except that "felicis" is the genitive rather than the comparative and superlative like "better" and "best." Oh. Yeah. That cleared *that* up! > Geoff: snip > So "felix felicis" could be translated as a name as "Lucky of the > Lucky" or something similar, remembering that there is no definite or indefinite pronoun (ie "a" or "the") in Latin. Potioncat: My Latin is even rustier. I thought Felix was cat. Has someone else offered that idea up? Turns out cat is Felis. So maybe it's Felix the Cat I remember. I wonder if JKR is making a sort of pun/word play on Felix and Felis. Which might make the lion-like man Felix Felicis. He's a happy, hep cat, man. I went to the enclycopedia to look up the Latin name for cat. You might like to know there is a Felis Geoffroy. With my poor translation skills, that becomes, Geoff, King of the Cats. (It's really Geoffrey Cat.) Potionfelis From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Apr 22 15:41:20 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:41:20 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" -- Ginny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127937 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lunamk03" wrote: > Luna : > > Back to my original point. I am not discussing the quality of the > information Ginny gave to Harry, it is clear that she wasn't lying > to him. I was giving an example of how Hermione was unable in that > situation to cheer an unhappy, miserable Harry up. She is aware of > this, she wants Harry to be happy, she knows she doesn't have all > the tools to make him happy so she required Ron and Ginny's support in Grimmauld Place. I love Hermione, I know she loves Harry (as a > friend, so far) and she wants him to be happy and save. I just want > to put into perspective this so often mentioned scene in Grimmauld > Place that some people like to bring up in order to make the point > on Hermione being the ? only one ? who could help Harry. This argument backfires as we see that the one actually cheering him up and getting to his heart is Ginny, not Hermione Hickengruendler: First of all, I'm not really a shipper. I think and hope Ron and Hermione will hook up, but if they don't, I also wouldn't really care. IMO, fandom has made the shipping much more important, than it really is. That said, I disagree that it was simply Ginny who brought Harry out of his shell. It was teamwork from all three of them (and with this I don't just mean that Ron wrote Hermione, who then catched Harry from his room, all three of them gave Harry important informations). He thought that he was possesed by Voldemort and somehow responsible for the attack of Arthur Weasley. Than Ginny told him from the symptoms she had while being possesed and asked him, if he had the same, which he denied. And I agree that it was a big part in helping Harry, but not the only one. At this point, Harry still had some doubts. But then Hermione reminded him again, that you cannot apparate out of Hogwart, and that even Voldemort isn't able to transport Harry from one place to another just like that. And then Ron backed her up in telling Harry, that he saw him having the nightmare and that Harry didn't left the room. It were all three of them who helped him, not just Hermione or just Ginny. The combination of what all three of them said cheered Harry up. And I don't think this scene is in any way meant as shipping-foreshadowing, but rather as an eye-opener for Harry, that he shouldn't cancel his friends out, when he has problems, because they can be a big help. Hickengruendler From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 22 15:45:59 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:45:59 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127938 Potioncat earlier: I wonder if JKR is making a sort of pun/word play on > Felix and Felis. Which might make the lion-like man Felix Felicis. He's > a happy, hep cat, man. Potioncat now: Although I can't find a Latin dictionary, the word Felicity means happiness and the root comes from Felix (Latin for Happy) So, if instead of Lucky, Felicis has to do with Happiness and if this person(?) does become a teacher at Hogwarts, we'll have a real contrast between the Happy Teacher and the Severe Teacher. Potionfelis From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 22 15:46:39 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:46:39 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127939 Potioncat: > My Latin is even rustier. I thought Felix was cat. Has someone else > offered that idea up? Turns out cat is Felis. So maybe it's Felix the > Cat I remember. I wonder if JKR is making a sort of pun/word play on > Felix and Felis. Which might make the lion-like man Felix Felicis. > He's a happy, hep cat, man. SSSusan: You're not alone in this thought, Potioncat (aka, "Potionfelis" -- hee, gotta love that). When JKR first announced this term or phrase or name (whatever it turns out to be), I came up with exactly what you did -- posted it at OTC, I do believe. I definitely was thinking of the Felix the Cat cartoon... and of that leonine description we'd gotten previously... and figured the new DADA instructor was a leonine man named Felix Felicis. (IIRC, I was hooted out of the room. ;-)) Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 22 15:56:16 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:56:16 -0000 Subject: Intermingling of Muggle and Wizard Worlds In-Reply-To: <4268EF5D.00000C.04032@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127940 "Donna" wrote: > Also, I have a feeling that there is business done between the > wizard merchants and muggle merchants, mostly for wizard > manufacturing materials. The muggles may not know of the > business but my instincts tell me that wizard merchants get some > of their materials from muggles. We know that various wizards > and witches live among muggles, i.e. Mrs. Figg. Also, all of > the Dursleys definitely know of the wizard world even though > they would rather not. > > I hope this makes sense to you all. SSSusan: Absolutely, Donna, you're not the only one who has proposed a network of connections between Wizard merchants and Muggle suppliers. I like to think of it more as a *network* of WitchWizard or Squib go- betweens, although the possibility of a few friendly Muggles who can keep secrets also being involved isn't beyong the realm of what's reasonable either, I don't think. There may well be a certain number of witches, wizards or squibs who *want* to work in the Muggle world in order to provide the mechanism for moving materials from MW to WW. I also happen to believe there are some members of the WW serving in the special function of running dual-purpose post offices. That is, they handle Muggle mail but also know what to do with mail being delivered to or from the WW. This would make life easier for folks like the Creeveys, Grangers and Dursleys (on those few occasions when they actually send Harry something). These people who run the go-between operations or serve as suppliers, or "re-routers" if you will, would have to be persons of great discretion. But I think it might be quite fun to be working in such a capacity -- especially if one came originally from the MW and had some reservations about leaving it totally behind. What would be more fun that working with regular mail *and* Owl Post? :-) To borrow a phrase from Steve, just making it up as I go along. Siriusly Snapey Susan From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Apr 22 16:42:56 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:42:56 -0000 Subject: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127941 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > My Latin is even rustier. I thought Felix was cat. Has someone else > offered that idea up? Turns out cat is Felis. So maybe it's Felix the > Cat I remember. I wonder if JKR is making a sort of pun/word play on > Felix and Felis. Which might make the lion-like man Felix Felicis. He's > a happy, hep cat, man. > > I went to the enclycopedia to look up the Latin name for cat. You might > like to know there is a Felis Geoffroy. With my poor translation > skills, that becomes, Geoff, King of the Cats. (It's really Geoffrey > Cat.) Geoff: Drat and blast. One of the group has already blown my cover as the Half-Blood Prince as a result of that bit of trivia..... Seriously, though, picking up on one or two items. I used "lucky" for convenience but my Latin dictionary gives "felix" as "lucky/happy/fortunate/successful" and, interestingly, cat is given as "feles", not "felis"; they are completely different words however. Felis Geoffroyi is one of the ocelot family apparently. Bearing in mind that my name is derived from Gottfried (=God's peace), we have a religiously satisfied cat. Working on mz-annethropes suggestion, I think Felix Felixson would be a good translation. From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 22 17:09:17 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:09:17 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why Snape Hates Neville (Another New Wild Hare theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127942 Hannah (among others) suggests: >I'd not heard the theory of Snape being in love with Alice, but it >would work as well as it does for Lily - in fact, probably better. *snips discussion of possible love or friendship with Alice Longbottom* >I still lean towards the reluctant belief that Snape is horrible to >Neville because he is an easy target. But these are some really >interesting alternatives. One thing we learned in OotP is that Harry isn't the only person who bears a strong resemblance to one of his parents. Neville Longbottom looks enough like his mother that Harry recognized her in a picture. So it may be another case of Snape's having someone from his past (for good or ill) looking back at him in class all year. Janet Anderson From theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 22 17:58:05 2005 From: theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net (theotokos) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 10:58:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website FAQ Poll In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050422175805.96949.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127943 I seems to me that JKR has taken an especially long time to answer the most recent poll question. My computer shows the 2nd option "What is the significance of Neville being the other boy to whom the prophecy might have referred?" has by far the most votes at 68%. I am beginning to think this subject might be a focus of the HBP and that is why she is neglecting to answer it. Anyone else think so? Then again, if she never intended to answer it on the website why would she present it as an option? Maybe it is my impatience but I don't recall her taking so long before. theotokos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From celletiger at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 18:17:30 2005 From: celletiger at yahoo.com (Marcelle) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 18:17:30 -0000 Subject: Snape's Annual DADA Application Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127944 Potioncat: As a side note: we're told Lockhart was the only candidate; and we're told Snape applies every year. Which one isn't true? celletiger: It seems so out of character for Snape to apply for the DADA every single year for 15 years. I know in OotP he admits this is true to Umbridge during her evaluation of his classroom, but even though its firmly stated there in canon (sorry no page ref for you), I still find it hard to believe. I thought it was a rumor perpetuated by students. It must be lonely living in a castle with the same people daily, yearly...why would he put himself through the embarassment from his contemporaries and students (b/c they always find out these things)? Applying for the DADA job every year sends out several negative messages. 1. To the students, it sends the message that he doesn't want to teach Potions at all. Typical students would take this as a lack of respect for the material, and therefore not feel its worth their time learning Potions if the Potions master doesnt want to be there. IMHO, this is why Snape has to teach through fear. 2. To his boss, the yearly app sends the message that he doesnt want the job he has. In the RW, Snape would have been let go from his post after about the third application for lack of respect for the job he already has. It's not as if he is asking for a promotion - its s simple lateral move. Snape obviously has had job security despite his request for transfer 15 times. I think this is evidence that Snape is at Hogwarts for his own protection from LV. Since Snape's yearly DADA app has been placed in the fact column, there must be a reason for it. Either give us a good reason for Snape not landing the job of his dreams, or let 'im have it, DD. Let Snape have a go at teaching Defense Against the Dark Arts at Hogwarts. What's the worst that could happen?(!) Happy Friday, celletiger From imontero at iname.com Fri Apr 22 16:58:23 2005 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 16:58:23 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" / Teamwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127945 > Hickengruendler: > I disagree that it was simply Ginny who brought Harry out of > his shell. It was teamwork from all three of them (and with > this I don't just mean that Ron wrote Hermione, who then catched > Harry from his room, all three of them gave Harry important > informations). The combination of what all three of them > said cheered Harry up. And I don't think this scene is in any > way meant as shipping-foreshadowing, but rather as an eye-opener > for Harry, that he shouldn't cancel his friends out, when he has > problems, because they can be a big help. Luna: Exactly! I agree with you (although I am not sure that Ron sent that letter to Hermione). If you read the message I sent before this one, you'll see that I made reference to the teamwork in this scene. I am answering to the notion that some people have about Hermione being "the only one" to help Harry in this scene in order to support H/H. I also believe that the "shippy" aspect of the book, although fun to dicuss ;-)), is not very relevant when it comes down to the main plot. It can add humour and realism to the story, but it hasn't (and I think it never will) play a mayor role in the main plot (and this is another reason why I think H/H is unlikely to happen). Marcela : > Nobody succeeded (not that they tried hard) in taking him out > of this mood, despite some of them (Ron, the twins, Ginny and > even perhaps DD through Phineas) knowing the cause of this > behaviour: his overhearing Moody's comment of perhaps having > been possessed... Why would Jo make Hermione come to his > rescue? Especially after she (Jo) had created a different > scenario for Hermione's holiday? There is authorial intent > here, but of course, this interpretation is up for grabs. Luna: it seems the shippy discussion moved to this list ;-)! Just a reminder: 1- Hermione did took Harry out of the drawing room and took him to his room. 2- In Harry's room Ron and Ginny were already waiting for them. 3- Harry was still in the same dark, hostile mood when he got to his room with Hermione (which indicates that Hermione didn't take him out of his bad mood, only succeeded to convince him to get out of the drawing room) 4- Ginny confronts Harry when she explains to Harry the symptoms of a real possession. 5- Harry reckons that Ginny is right and feels hope in his heart. 6- Hermione+Ron reinforce Ginny's arguments et voil?! Harry is back to his normal self again. Sooooo, this sounds like teamwork to me. Granted, Hermione cancelled her trip to go to Grimmauld Place, but I think this wasn't "only to save Harry." Ron's father was in a critical condition in the hospital. I think she had Harry as well as Ron in mind when she decided to call off her trip. Harry was the most urgent case to solve when she got there. Obviously, before knocking Harry's door, she had arranged with Ginny and Ron the plan to help Harry (again, they were waiting for them in Harry's room and had sandwiches and everything). BTW, I find rather suspicious that Hermione keeps on spending vacations with Ron and Ron's family (summer, Christmas, etc...) As you can see, canon facts show us that there is very little shippy material in the Grimmauld place events. From tekayjaye at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 17:03:15 2005 From: tekayjaye at yahoo.com (tekayjaye) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 17:03:15 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down / DADA - Snape and Lockhart In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127946 > Potioncat: > As a side note: we're told Lockhart was the only candidate; and > we're told Snape applies every year. Which one isn't true? Tekay now: They're both true. Just because Snape applies every year doesn't mean that he is a candidate for the job. For reasons still unknown to us, Dumbledore apparently doesn't think Snape is qualified for the position; therefore Snape will not be considered for the job. From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Apr 22 18:55:22 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 18:55:22 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down (was: Hagrid's Tale) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127947 > > > Alla:> > That is the thing though. Would it have been the RIGHT thing if Lupin would have resigned? Sure, it was VERY dangerous for him to run around without Wolfsbane, but as someone suggested - the circumstances were SO very far from ordinary and so very not likely to be repeated again I think that now Lupin is unlikely to forget about the Wolfsbane ever in his life, although again as I mentioned earlier if you have to take medication all your life, you ARE likely to forget about it sometimes under far less stressful circumstances, IMO.> Pippin:Well, which is it? Can Dumbledore reasonably expect that Lupin would never forget his potion again, or not? Lupin didn't *choose* to forget about his potion, in your scenario, so how could he make a better choice next time? It's possible that Lupin was on his second chance already, because of the prank. But even if that's not so, the one thing that seems to light Dumbledore's fuse is a physical threat to a student. Regardless of how extraordinary the circumstances were, (and there has never been a year at Hogwarts when the circumstances weren't somehow extraordinary) Lupin's first responsibility in loco parentis was the safety of his students. He kept three of them in the Shrieking Shack for at least an hour, refusing to allow Ron to go back to the castle ("You're going to hear me out, Ron") out of bounds, after dark, in the presence of a werewolf and a wizard who killed at least a dozen people with a single curse (whether that wizard was Sirius or Pettigrew). Dumbledore seems to have believed that Lupin was trying to save their lives. But it was still extraordinarily foolish for Lupin to have tried to deal with the situation all by himself, especially if, as an Order member, he could easily have communicated with Dumbledore. Dumbledore did not refuse to accept Lupin's resignation, and I think if Lupin hadn't offered it, he would have been sacked. Pippin From BrwNeil at aol.com Fri Apr 22 19:40:03 2005 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 15:40:03 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: "A Little Romance" -- Ginny Message-ID: <1ef.3a71dcc3.2f9aad13@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127948 In a message dated 4/22/2005 10:26:10 AM Eastern Standard Time, imontero at iname.com writes: I just want to put into perspective this so often mentioned scene in Grimmauld Place that some people like to bring up in order to make the point on Hermione being the ? only one ? who could help Harry. This argument backfires as we see that the one actually cheering him up and getting to his heart is Ginny, not Hermione? Who cheered Harry up is a matter of interpretation, but there are some facts that can't be arguied: 1. No one really tried to talk to Harry, until Hermione got there. 2. Hermioine canceled her vacation as soon as she heard what happened. 3. Hermione went directly to Harry as soon as she got in the door. Personally I feel that it was a combination of the things said by Ginny, Ron and Hermione that brought Harry around. None of the three deserves all the credit. Neil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From feenyjam at msu.edu Fri Apr 22 19:30:50 2005 From: feenyjam at msu.edu (greenfirespike) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 19:30:50 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down / DADA - Snape and Lockhart In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127949 > > > > Potioncat: > > As a side note: we're told Lockhart was the only candidate; and > > we're told Snape applies every year. Which one isn't true? > > > Tekay now: > > They're both true. Just because Snape applies every year doesn't > mean that he is a candidate for the job. For reasons still unknown > to us, Dumbledore apparently doesn't think Snape is qualified for > the position; therefore Snape will not be considered for the job. Greenfirespike says: Constantly applying Snape doesn't always have to apply to apply. What I'm saying is that Snape works at Hogwarts, and has undoubtedly made clear his desire to teach DADA. Perhaps each of his first few years he submitted his resume (if such things exist in the WW) to DD and anxiously awaited a response. However, after over a decade of rejection, perhaps Snape no longer needs to submit anything. Just swing by DD's office and drop a hint. I worked with a guy who applied to any and every job opening that occurred in our company. After about two years, he no longer needed to submit his resume, as it was passed on to each manager then hiring. It was well known around the office that he was "considered" for every position, but not actually considered. Thus, Snape can apply while never truly being a candidate. It seems that DD does most of the Hogwarts hiring, and he probably has his mind made up about Snape before Snape request the position. Greenfirespike From quatsch42 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 23:52:57 2005 From: quatsch42 at yahoo.com (quatsch42) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 23:52:57 -0000 Subject: Snape's Annual DADA Application In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127950 celletiger: It seems so out of character for Snape to apply for the DADA every single year for 15 years. 2. To his boss, the yearly app sends the message that he doesnt want the job he has. I think this is evidence that Snape is at Hogwarts for his own protection from LV. quatsch: I always rather assumed that it was a front put up for Lord Voldemort's sake -- that Snape first took the Hogwarts job because of LV's instruction. If it were just for his own protection, then why would DD even ask him to return? (or am I reading too much into this?) Canon timelines (from http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/main/timeline_1970-1990.html) imply that Snape either applied for the DADA position and got the Potions position in 1981, either before Voldemort's fall or just a month or two afterward. Either way, I would say that Snape applied for the position at Voldemort's behest -- the benefits of having a DE at Hogwarts would be immense, in terms of keeping an eye on DD and having an "in" to the security of the castle. The benefits of having the Hogwarts DE be the DADA teacher would be even greater, as that DE could ensure that the next generation has little understanding of the ways to counteract LV et al. I would say then that Snape kept applying to keep up the front, just in case LV ever returned. Or, possibly, in case anyone else ever questioned Snape's loyalty (Malfoy in a possible power grab?) Paranoid of Snape? Perhaps. But very good to keep up appearances; it saves his butt without much work on his part at all. And DD may be in on the reason why Snape keeps reapplying; perhaps DD even has asked him to. Then he's not sending the message he doesn't want the job, but rather the message "I'll risk my skin if I ever apply for a different job". The psychology here could be very complicated, depending on which way Snape is bent -- actually towards Dumbledore, this keeps up appearances and lets LV/et al think that he is really on their side and DD is the bad guy, refusing to let Snape have this extremely advantageous position. If actually towards LV, DD may know (or at least suspect) and want to keep Snape out of that situation that is potentially dangerous for both himself and his students, and thus the applying and the turning down is genuine. Having Snape as Potions master keeps Snape under DD's eyes without ever putting Snape into a situation where he'd have to prove his loyalty one way or the other, thus exposing himself to be on either one side or the other. He can stay a spy (bent whichever way you like). Snape continuing to apply for the DADA position and being continually turned down is the absolute best situation for everyone involved, I think. -- quatsch (I think I read about this theory somewhere before, but I can't for the life of me remember where...) From ajroald at yahoo.com Fri Apr 22 23:27:03 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2005 23:27:03 -0000 Subject: Website FAQ Poll In-Reply-To: <20050422175805.96949.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127951 theotokos wrote: > I seems to me that JKR has taken an especially long time to > answer the most recent poll question. Then again, if > she never intended to answer it on the website why would she > present it as an option? Not one to check in on the updates of JKR's website often (and I've often missed when the 'Do Not Disturb' door actually opens because of this), but her lack of updating could be the fact that she has a new baby. IMHO, she wouldn't have the question up if she didn't intend to answer it. Just a thought ~ Lea From crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in Sat Apr 23 06:21:08 2005 From: crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in (Subhash Sane) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 07:21:08 +0100 (BST) Subject: SHIP: Susan Bones - The Candidate Message-ID: <20050423062108.37791.qmail@web8510.mail.in.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127952 We have been seeing the girls and the girlfriends of Harry Potter since the Philosopher?s Stone. The list of worthier candidates for the post of ?Girlfriend? is even longer than that of Harry?s enemies. We had been adding the names, cutting them off from the list after few books; but we didn?t come across that one girl who we can certainly call ??Harry?s TRUE Girlfriend?. Like Black family tree, which was written on a tapestry, I had also written Harry?s Girlfriend(s) - The Candidates List on a wall. Cho?s place was blown off, the moment I finished reading OOTP. I put a big cross on Ginny?s name, but by muggle pencil. I hesitated including Luna here in the list. Hermione was not at all on the list from the start, because if I had included Harry?s name here in this list, there won?t be any girl remaining in Ron?s Girlfriend list, right? Ron and Hermione should be ?the pair? in spite of being an odd couple. Moaning Myrtle will always be on the list forever being one-way traffic it is. But at present nobody seemed to be a good girl who can understand Harry. What Harry will need in Book-6 is the steady relationship, but I am not at all sure any of the above-mentioned girls can love and understand Harry Potter. What to do then? The answer is- Just include one more. But this time, I seem to have hit the gold. This is because the candidate whom I am referring to will be the perfect and I mean, absolutely perfect girl for Harry. SUSAN BONES- Yes! Susan Bones. We have seen her talking to Harry a little. She is also in DA on her own decision, which makes her a good thinker and sensible character. Her family is close to OOTP gang too. Her grandparents were murdered by Lord Voldemort. She gave her mute consent to Harry by joining DA formed by PWG (Potter, Weasley and Granger). And remember, JKR wouldn?t reveal that particular name so easily. She would let that name in the closet for some period and reveal it when the moment comes. We know the name-Susan Bones since Philosopher?s Stone. In the sorting ceremony of Philosopher?s Stone, her name had come. She was sorted into Hufflepuff. Seeing Cedric, I believe that Hufflepuffs are sensible in nature. And she also seems to be a sensible and the girl who understand others. And one more thing, JKR haven?t mentioned Susan Bones hanging out with boyfriend(s), is it? I will be happy if they get together. Susan Bones looks like the better one than the rest. It will be interesting to watch her and Harry alone and together. Susan Bones ? Any votes in her favour ? "crownless_aragorn" From crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in Sat Apr 23 06:27:49 2005 From: crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in (Subhash Sane) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 07:27:49 +0100 (BST) Subject: Voldemort's diet - My theory Message-ID: <20050423062749.6954.qmail@web8508.mail.in.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127953 Hello to all of you. 'What does Voldemort?s diet consist of?' This is what we will try to find out here. I can?t imagine Voldemort eating ?Mashed Potatoes?. We have seen him talking potions from Wormtail to stay alive before his re-birth ceremony. It is more likely that his diet consist of potions only. It is also likely that all those potions are invented by him only. Voldemort had taken certain steps because of which he didn?t die when the spell rebounded. The potions in his daily diet are one of these steps. The potions in his diet must be acting as slow but strong drugs. Those potions must have been helping him in his resistance against natural death. He didn?t manage to find a formula for ?Elixir of life?. It seems that he has developed his own formula for fighting death. He is certainly the second best after Nicholas Flamel as far as potions is concerned. But, I wouldn?t ever want to be like Nicholas Flamel or Voldemort. It seems that Dumbledore agrees with me too. "crownless_aragorn" From kjones at telus.net Sat Apr 23 07:55:31 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 00:55:31 -0700 Subject: DADA Teacher Message-ID: <4269FF73.7070504@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 127954 Kathy writes: During one interview, JKR refused to answer a paerson asking if a DADA teacher would last two years. This could mean that: a. Lupin returns for the next one or two books (perhaps the most likely considering the secrecy) b. Snape gets it for the next two books (this would solve Harry's potions problem, force him into a different relationshipwith Snape) c. A whole new character (although I don't see why she would need to refuse to answer the question if that was the case) Any other possibilities??? KJ From lavaluvn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 23 09:07:46 2005 From: lavaluvn at yahoo.com (Andromeda) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 09:07:46 -0000 Subject: The Bookshelf on JKR's Website and a Request for Help In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127955 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "antoshachekhonte" wrote: > > Tamee said: > > > I think the strongest parallel between Sayer's detective stories and JKR > > apart from the liberal use of misdirection and the creation of some > > memorable characters is the theme of choosing what is right over what is > > easy. Lord Peter pursues truth regardless of the personal consequences. In > > one book, it looks like either his brother or his sister may be guilty of > > murder. In another, he risks losing Harriet in pursuit of a deadly poison > > pen. In another, the very act of his meddling precipitates the murderer > > into committing more crimes. Always, there is the determination to see > > justice carried out. It's the kind of determination I see in Dumbledore, > > and in Harry too, even when he's wrong, at least he's determined to do > > what's right despite the consequences. > > > > Tamee > > mostly lurking nowadays and a great fan of Sayers, JKR, and Jane Austen. > > Antosha: > As another fan of JKR, Jane Austen and Dorothy Sayers, I agree with everything you say > here--all three women write compelling stories about characters who MAKE THEMSELVES. > Peter Wimsey by all rights should be what he appears to be at first glance--a supercilious > fop. In fact, he is a brilliant, principled, deeply interesting character. > > > Antosha, who has to run out and find a copy of Busman's Honeymoon (my old one ran off!) Andromeda now: Aahh, but it (B.H.) never lives up to Gaudy Night, no matter how many times you reread it. How wonderful to hear that Sayers and Austen are on Jo's bookshelf: they were my two favorite authors way back in, well, a very long time ago. And I haven't attempted a comparative literature essay in nearly as long a time. But both Tamee and Antosha made some excellent points. Perhaps another connection might be simply in the writing style. Both authors tend towards a rather dry sense of humor in their writing, managing to simultaneously create a lighthearted overall tone while touching on deeper human emotions and social mores. You get the sense of writers who don't take themselves too seriously, yet may have important things to say, indirectly. I think our Jo follows a similar pattern. Her language, aimed at a younger audience, I suppose, isn't as beautiful as Sayers or Austen's, but I definitely see her style as growing out of the tradition of these two marvelous writers. -Andromeda From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Apr 23 09:44:16 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 09:44:16 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down /Lupin and DADA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127956 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > As a side note: we're told Lockhart was the only candidate; and we're > told Snape applies every year. Which one isn't true? Hickengruendler: IMO, the first one. I think that Hagrid just told them that Lockhart was the only candidate to cover up for Snape. Imagine he would say: "Well, Lockhart is totally incompetent, but Dumbledore still chose him over Snape." Hagrid just showed some solidarity towards Snape, IMO. Hickengruendler From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 23 14:44:43 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:44:43 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's diet - My theory In-Reply-To: <20050423062749.6954.qmail@web8508.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127957 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Subhash Sane wrote: > > 'What does Voldemort's diet consist of?' (Snip) It is more likely that his diet consist of potions only. > It is also likely that all those potions are invented by him only. (Snip) Those potions must have been helping him in his resistance against natural death. He didn't manage to find a > formula for `Elixir of life'. It seems that he has developed his > own formula for fighting death. He is certainly the second best > after Nicholas Flamel as far as potions is concerned. Tonks: Maybe his diet is only of potions, maybe not. But I am sure that he is not *the second best after Nicholas Flamel*. He knows his spells, true. But I would bet that Snape is a better potions Master than LV. And DD is better than LV too. I just can't see LV as that good at potions, better than most maybe, but not better than DD or Snape. Bet ya.. Tonks_op From Ali at zymurgy.org Sat Apr 23 16:03:54 2005 From: Ali at zymurgy.org (Ali) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 16:03:54 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127958 Accio UK is delighted to announce Professor Edmund Kern as a guest speaker as part of our balanced programme of events for the Accio 2005 conference being held in Reading, UK. His presentation is entitled "The Phoenix in Harry Potter: the Metaphoric Power of the Past" Edmund M. Kern is the author of The Wisdom of Harry Potter: What Our Favorite Hero Teaches Us About Moral Choices (Prometheus Books, September 2003) and "Harry Potter, Stoic Boy Wonder" Professor Kern received his Ph.D. in Early Modern European History from the University of Minnesota, and he is currently Chair of the Department of History at Lawrence University in Appleton, Wisconsin, where he has taught since 1992.. He has served as a media consultant on witchcraft and witch-hunting, historical and modern paganism, and the roots of Halloween. In addition to continuing work on other projects, he is completing Witchcraft and the Confessional State, a book on religion and politics in European witchcraft-trials. ********************************************************************* Accio is also delighted to invite all its delegates to participate in its show trial of Severus Snape. The trial will take place with the Potions Master in absentia. He will be tried on the following 4 counts (a Ron style explanation is provided on our website) 1. That the accused did, feloniously, treasonously and with malice aforethought, combine with others to support the most bloody, abhominable and beastly cause of the notorious, prescribed and avowed traitor Thomas Marvolo Riddle, sometime called Lord Voldemort; 2. That the accused did, feloniously, treasonously and with malice aforethought, voluntarily accept membership within a prescribed and illegal organisation, vulgarly termed "the Death Eaters"; 3. That the accused, feloniously, treasonously and with malice aforethought, continues as a member in said illegal organisation 4. That the accused has on divers occasions and under the guise of lawful chastisement committed assault and battery on minors in respect of whom he was in loco parentis, such assault and battery being occasioned by divers magical and physical means, and resulting in perceptible physical and psychological harm to the said minors. To successfully try Severus Snape the Accio team needs you! We therefore cordially extend an invitation to all attendees to participate in this event. Further details are available on our website: http://www.accio.org.uk/snapestrial.shtml Accio UK is the first conference of its kind in the UK and will be held at Reading University from July 29th-31st 2005. It is an unofficial, non-profit making, friendly event that will bring together academics and adult Harry Potter fans to discuss all aspects of J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series. Planned events include presentations, panels, speeches, games, a feast, and informal discussions into the small hours. All meals are also included in the registration fees. It is recommended that you book prior to 30th April 2005 to take advantage of current prices. An instalment plan is available until the month end. For further information please see our website: http://www.accio.org.uk. Details of how to register can be found here: http://www.accio.org.uk/registration.shtml This conference is an unofficial event and is not endorsed or sanctioned by Warner Bros., the Harry Potter book publishers or J.K. Rowling and her representatives From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 23 20:44:16 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 20:44:16 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127960 I was recently browsing the Leaky Lounge Forums, and a gentleman called 'The Curious Mr Quint' started the thread on ways of killing Harry. He proposed a scenario in which Voldemort Polyjuiced as Sirius to lure Harry into a trap. While 'The Curious Mr Quint' was soliciting other scenarios in which Voldemort could kill Harry, that brought up a much greater question in my mind, and that question is not 'How can it be done?', but 'Is it even possible given what we know?'. Here are the key points - Next, in our attempts to kill Harry, here are a few things we should consider. Love Shield- 'Love Shield' refer to the protection of love that Lily transferred to Harry when she sacrificed herself to save baby-Harry from Voldemort. Though few of us do, we should ask ourselves if Lily's love protection is Universal, or is it unique to Voldemort. Regardless of who was doing the cursing, Lily dying for Harry should have given him a universal protection, in my opinion. In other words, if Voldemort had killed Lily thus creating the Love Shield, and then Peter Petigrew stepped forward to land the killing blow on Harry, Harry would have still been protected and the rebounding curse would have bounced back against Peter. Again, that's my speculation. The alternate is, that because Voldemort caused Lily's death, the Love Shield is then unique to Voldmort. Because Voldemort caused the harm, Harry is protected from futher harm caused by Voldemort. That seems a little convoluted, but I hope it makes sense. I think most people are just assuming that Harry is uniquely and specifically protected from Voldemort, but do you still hold that opinion after giving the possibilities a long hard analysis? Personally, while the Shield may be strongest against Voldemort, I can't see any reason why it isn't universal. I can' t see how or why it wouldn't give Harry protection against any and all attackers bend on causing death. I limited the protection to death, because we have already seen Draco curse Harry effectively, but these where schoolboy harrassment curses. The Prophecy Shield- Next we have the Prophecy, it implies that only Harry can defeat (assumed kill) Voldemort, but if we accept that, then shouldn't we equally accept that only Voldemort can kill Harry? And, if that is true, doesn't that give them each an additional level of protection? If only Voldemort can defeat (assume kill) Harry, doesn't that imply by extension that Lucius and Bellatrix can not defeat/kill Harrry? And, extending that farther, doesn't that imply a somewhat limited invulnerability for both Harry and Voldemort? Voldemort's Shield- We don't have details, but we know Voldemort has spent his whole adult life pursuing and experimenting with protections against death. Further, we know that one of more of these has, to some degree, worked. Now combine this new concept of Prophecy Shield with the protections that both Harry and Voldemort originally each uniquely had, and you have two extremely hard to kill people. Let me expand this by asking a question, if you were a general wizard or a Death Eater, give that Harry couldn't be killed by the strongest Dark Lord in a century, and given that the attempt by said wizard rebound and generally destroyed said wizard, would you want to be the next person to attempt to kill Harry? Just on the original vanquishing of Voldemort by baby Harry alone, I can't imagine that any one is too eager to put Harry's vulnerability to the test. I certainly wouldn't want to be the first. Now in terms of the End Game, the conclusion of the story, things have gotten a little sticky. It's not simply a matter of an effective way to lure one or the other into a trap. It's going to take some very special and unique circumstances to cause the downfall of either Harry or Voldemort. It's going to take some very special, unique, and powerful magic to accomplish the job. Although, perhaps the key is that to 'vanquish' either, the solution is to NOT use magic; for one to kill the other by non-magical means; think Colt 45, the Arch/Veil of Death, or even Sword of Gryffindor. This is what make the conclusion of the series so spectacular, JKR, in a sense, has written herself into a corner, but placing both key characters in a position where they can't actually be killed. Yet, in the end, we know that one or the other must be killed, or if not killed then so sufficiently vanquished as to prevent them from ever being a threat again. That leaves us with one overriding heart-pounding sleepless-night inducing question - HOW? Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Apr 23 21:38:22 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 21:38:22 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127961 Steve: > The Prophecy Shield- > > Next we have the Prophecy, it implies that only Harry can defeat > (assumed kill) Voldemort, but if we accept that, then shouldn't we > equally accept that only Voldemort can kill Harry? And, if that is > true, doesn't that give them each an additional level of > protection? If only Voldemort can defeat (assume kill) Harry, > doesn't that imply by extension that Lucius and Bellatrix can not > defeat/kill Harrry? And, extending that farther, doesn't that > imply a somewhat limited invulnerability for both Harry and > Voldemort? SSSusan: I don't think we do have reason to believe this works in both directions, Steve. While it's true that the prophecy stated that neither can live while the other survives, *that* part of the prophecy is not the part which speaks to who can kill whom. The part which implies that only *Harry* can kill Voldy is: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches." The prophecy doesn't contain a corollary clause which says or infers "The one with the power to vanquish Harry approaches." So I guess I am not willing to go along with the notion that only Voldy and Harry can kill each other. Steve: > Let me expand this by asking a question, if you were a general > wizard or a Death Eater, give that Harry couldn't be killed by the > strongest Dark Lord in a century, and given that the attempt by > said wizard rebound and generally destroyed said wizard, would you > want to be the next person to attempt to kill Harry? SSSusan: Now *this* much I'd be willing to go along with. No, if I were a DE, knowing what happend to Voldy when he tried to kill infant Harry, I'd not want to take a chance on another rebound. But it wouldn't be because of a belief that *only* Voldy could kill him; it would be out of a fear that NO ONE will be able to kill him -- at least by an AK. Now, an *AK-47* might be another matter. ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 21:55:15 2005 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 21:55:15 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" / Teamwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127962 Luna said: >>>Obviously, before knocking Harry's door, she had arranged with Ginny and Ron the plan to help Harry (again, they were waiting for them in Harry's room and had sandwiches and everything).<<< Stefanie writes: Mmm, except for the fact that when Harry immediately opens the door to Hermione's voice, "[t]here [is] snow in her hair and her face [is] pink with cold." Bits of conversation are alluded to later in the chapter, but unless she, Ron and Ginny planned really, really quickly, I don't see how your scenario can be plausible, especially as support for a 'shipping theory. Also with the information that Hermione give us a bit later: "Ron's mum has lit a fire in there and she's sent up sandwiches." it seems a bit more likely that Molly wrote to Hermione and planned out this bit in a letter. Figure this: If Hermione were to just burst through the door and march right up to Harry's room, only someone who was already in on the idea (or who had somewhat requested her arrival) would've been able to prepare a room that quickly. Luna said: >>>I am answering to the notion that some people have about Hermione being "the only one" to help Harry in this scene in order to support H/H.<<< I think that's a silly notion, also. Obviously they all help him. However, it is worth noting that while Harry was taking "savage pleasure" in keeping himself in his room and is shown ignoring both Sirius's happy caroling and Molly's soft calling, he answers the door to Hermione without any hesitation. That is a noted difference in reaction -- he has pretty much spiteful behavior towards two characters who are arguably his mother and father figures. We see no effort on Ginny and Ron's part to come and get him, and see Harry feeling that Grimmauld Place is worse than Privet Drive. Quite dismal, really. While Hermione isn't the only one who is able to help him overall (Harry *does* have good friendS), why try to discount a simple fact: 'shippy or not 'shippy, Harry responds to Hermione without hesitation. Luna said: >>>3- Harry was still in the same dark, hostile mood when he got to his room with Hermione (which indicates that Hermione didn't take him out of his bad mood, only succeeded to convince him to get out of the drawing room)<<< If you read the discourse in the moment which Hermione is in Harry's room, her intent doesn't seem to be to "cheer him up" -- she doesn't attempt to do that, her mission is to get Harry out of the room and into a discussion. I don't think it's a slight on Hermione's character that she is pretty much determined to get him out of the room he's been associating with his isolation and into a room with two other people who he seems to trust. After Hermione enters Harry's room, she tells him why she's there and leads him into the other room -- involving Ron and Ginny isn't some show of how inept she is at relating to Harry. I think it's a reflection, as others have said, on the strength of the friendships that are later solidified as the six emerging from the DoM. Luna said: >>>>BTW, I find rather suspicious that Hermione keeps on spending vacations with Ron and Ron's family<<< At this point, Hermione's nearly 16 and Ron's 15...even if they were romantically inclined (which I most certainly do not buy) it really doesn't make much sense for either the Grangers or the Weasleys to invite her to spend vacations because of that -- especially since Hermione's presence at the Weasleys has been alluded to in previous books. Honestly, especially with the less-than-sexually-forward (not that they'd be shagging, but having one's girlfriend stay over for an entire vacation does not really seem Arthur and Molly) culture of the Wizarding World, I don't find this a believable theory. It makes much more sense to go with the reasoning given in the books. Hermione's not been over the Weasley's all that often: the summer before 4th year for the QWC she arrived only a day earlier than Harry, she spent what we gather as most of the summer at OotP HQ (which to me speaks more of Voldemort's rising than romantic involvement), and spends Christmas in the episode we've discussed. "keeps on spending"? Hmm... Stefanie, who naught but two hours ago geeked out a purchased a JKR biography from good ol' B&N From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 22:00:28 2005 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 22:00:28 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down /Lupin and DADA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127963 > Potioncat: > I've seen it suggested that DD hired Lupin at this particular time > because Black had escaped. As an Order member he could be an extra- > special pair of hands. This, of course, presumes that DD thought > Black was guilty and Lupin was trustworthy. Stefanie: Had the Order reconvened at that time? I mean, he was a previous order member, but IMHO I think Lupin was hired as a personal protection measure. Black had escaped, had presumably murdered two of three of his childhood friends... I think this goes along with a possible tradition of "protection hiring" at Hogwarts. Trelawney is hired after giving a partially overheard prophecy, Snape is hired after being outed as a spy (latter based on his account in OotP that he'd been teaching for fourteen years.) -- Hogwarts is touted as the safest place in the Wizarding World, after all... Stefanie From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 23 22:21:05 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 22:21:05 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127964 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Steve: > > The Prophecy Shield- > > > > Next we have the Prophecy, it implies that only Harry can defeat > > (assumed kill) Voldemort, but if we accept that, then shouldn't we > > equally accept that only Voldemort can kill Harry? ... > SSSusan: > I don't think we do have reason to believe this works in both > directions, Steve. While it's true that the prophecy stated that > neither can live while the other survives, *that* part of the > prophecy is not the part which speaks to who can kill whom. > > ...edited.. bboyminn replies: But what about- "Either MUST die at the hands of the other..." Prohpecies by their very nature are vague and esoteric, they are not detail scientific analysis of a future event. They are mystical ruminations that depend totally on interpretation for their meaning. Dumbledore interpets 'born as the seventh month dies' to mean Harry or Neville. Dumbledore interprets the 'Dark Lord' to mean Voldemort even though Voldemort isn't specifically mentioned. Dumbledore interprets Voldemort attacking Harry as 'marking' Harry because he is so obviously physically marked which combined with Voldemort's choice seems to solidify the interpretaion. But we don't know for a fact, that Voldemort specifically chose Potters first; they may have simply been his first available opportunity. Further, given that 'mark' has a broad and general meaning, we don't know for a fact that the Prophecy won't be fullfilled when, at some future point, Voldemort declares Neville a threat and thereby /marks/ him. Nothing is fact, it's all interpretaion. So if either Harry or Voldemort MUST die at the hand of the other, a reasonable interpretation is that Harry and Voldemort can die by the hand of NO other; meaning that only they have to power to kill each other which in turn means that no one else can kill them. Is that right? Well, we'll have to wait 3 years and see, but I think it is a fair interpretaion. I might be of a different opinion, if it has said 'one will die at the hand of the other', but it seems to says 'either Harry or Voldemort *MUST* die by the hand of the other'. Of course some have interpreted that phrase as 'either Harry or Neville must die at the hands of Voldemort' but that's a different discussion altogether, although it does very much re-enforce my position that the Prophecy greatly open to interpretation. > > SSSusan: > Now *this* much I'd be willing to go along with. ... But it > wouldn't be because of a belief that *only* Voldy could kill him; it > would be out of a fear that NO ONE will be able to kill him -- at > least by an AK. Now, an *AK-47* might be another matter. ;-) > > Siriusly Snapey Susan bboyminn concludes: AK-47, I like that, that's funny. As far as ONLY Voldy being able to kill Harry, I have implied that, but the great mystery is that we know Harry is protected from being killed by Voldemort AND Voldemort is protected against being killed by Harry, yet we also know that one MUST kill the other, which again makes the greatest question of all - HOW? Steve/bboyminn From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 22:36:57 2005 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 22:36:57 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127965 bboy: <> I don't think this is clear. In Ch. 37 of OotP, Dumbledore tells Harry "While you can still call home the place where your mother's blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by *Voldemort*" (my emphasis). This would suggest that the protection is unique to Voldemort, but in PoA, no one seemed concerned about Harry's safety after Sirius' escape from Azkaban until he ran away from Privet Drive. So presumably there was some thought that Harry was safe from someone other than Voldemort (in this instance, Sirius) while at home (where he is protected by a charm that uses the spilling of Lily's blood to protect him). Either way, what confuses me is that, despite Dumbledore's acknowledgment in GoF Ch. 36 that Voldemort "has overcome that particular barrier" (i.e., Lily's love shield) by using Harry's blood in his regeneration potion, the charm that protects Harry at Privet Drive remained in place subsequently. I would think that, once Voldemort overcame this obstacle, the charm would no longer retain its power. bboy: <<> I think the ambiguity in the prophecy's "neither can live while the other survives" wording is put to rest completely when Harry asks "so does that mean that...that one of us has got to kill the other one...in the end?" and Dumbledore responds "Yes" (Ch. 37, OotP). Which means, IMO, that only Harry can kill Voldemort (since he's the only one with the "power to vanquish the Dark Lord" who has been "marked as his equal"). However, I don't think it means that only Voldemort *can* kill Harry - but I do think it means that only Voldemort *will* kill Harry. I also don't think that it's the Prophecy itself that gives the additional level of protection - the Prophecy is only reporting on what is going to happen (it doesn't provide any sort of protection). bboy: <> Well, Barty Crouch Jr. was eager to try at the end of GoF, and many of the DEs during the chaos in the Department of Mysteries at the end of OotP sent curses Harry's way. But the DEs aren't the sanest of folks :) bboy: <> But they can (and, IMO, will) be killed - just only by one another. I'm convinced that, had Dumbledore not sent the golden wizard statute to protect Harry, Voldemort's AK would have killed Harry at the end of OotP. How Jo is going to play this out is beyond me - I think Harry's doomed, but I can't see Harry killing Voldemort - yet if she kills Harry and leaves Voldemort alive, it's going to be a most unsatisfatory ending to the series. ~Phyllis who thinks a dead Harry will be most unprofitable for WB, and definitely not fun for fans From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 22:44:09 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 22:44:09 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Susan Bones - The Candidate In-Reply-To: <20050423062108.37791.qmail@web8510.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127966 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Subhash Sane > > What to do then? The answer is- Just include one more. But this > time, I seem to have hit the gold. This is because the candidate > whom I am referring to will be the perfect and I mean, absolutely perfect girl for Harry. SUSAN BONES- Yes! Susan Bones. Susan Bones ? Any votes in her favour ? > > "crownless_aragorn" You have mine. I think that Susan Bones would be a perfect ship for Harry that could be a nice subplot in the series without becoming dominating. I think all the girls in the sextet are too tied to the main arch of the story to also be the LI. Susan is perfect for a 'little romance'. She has a background harry can relate to, she was one of the first people to trust him in the OOTP, she seems impressed by his magical skills, and her guardian is someone that Harry might need to contact for his future job. I can easily envsion a scene where Harry takes susan off to the side and asks if she can contact her aunt for him because he wanted to get some kind of waiver or something for the auror academy and noticing that she had a pretty smile or liked her hair or something like that. (Hmmm. Plot bunny?) I am predicting that Susan Bones will get some air time in the next book. phoenixgod2000 From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Apr 23 23:06:19 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:06:19 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127967 SSSusan previously: > > I don't think we do have reason to believe this works in both > > directions, Steve. While it's true that the prophecy stated > > that neither can live while the other survives, *that* part of > > the prophecy is not the part which speaks to who can kill whom. > > ...edited.. bboyminn replied: > But what about- > "Either MUST die at the hands of the other..." > > So if either Harry or Voldemort MUST die at the hand of the other, > a reasonable interpretation is that Harry and Voldemort can die by > the hand of NO other; meaning that only they have to power to kill > each other which in turn means that no one else can kill them. Is > that right? Well, we'll have to wait 3 years and see, but I think > it is a fair interpretaion. SSSusan: Heh heh. Whoops -- there *is* that part, isn't there? :-) You know, that part ["either MUST die at the hand of the other"] just leaves me confounded. Here's why I have trouble with it. If ONLY Voldy can kill Harry, then why is DD worried about Harry in Quidditch, in the TWT, etc.? Or is that just a concern for his general safety, as in not wanting him to break bones & such? More importantly for me, and bearing on the series' end... if ONLY Harry can kill Voldy **and** ONLY Voldy can kill Harry, then does that lock us in to a scenario at the end where both have to die? I know I certainly prefer to have Harry defeat/kill Voldy but to live himself. But if that were to happen, then how would Harry *ever* die, if his death MUST come at the hand of Voldy? Or is that where the distinction of "to die" and "to be killed" comes in? Only Voldy can KILL Harry, but he can DIE in any number of ways -- an accident, of old age, of illness, etc.? Or is JKR toying with us and "either" and "other" are in some convoluted way not necessarily talking about Harry & Voldy? Gah! I know this has been hashed over hundreds of times, but I still have questions. SSSusan: > > ... it would be out of a fear that NO ONE will be able to kill > > him -- at least by an AK. Now, an *AK-47* might be another > > matter. ;-) bboyminn concludes: > AK-47, I like that, that's funny. SSSusan: Happy to serve. :-) Steve: > As far as ONLY Voldy being able to kill Harry, I have implied that, > but the great mystery is that we know Harry is protected from being > killed by Voldemort AND Voldemort is protected against being > killed by Harry, yet we also know that one MUST kill the other, > which again makes the greatest question of all - HOW? SSSusan: See? You're doing it, too! I'm glad I'm not the only one ending posts on this topic with questions. Siriusly Snapey Susan, *hoping* that maybe some light will be shed on this in 83 days, but *suspecting* that no light will really be shed on it 'til we get Book 7. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 23:19:21 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:19:21 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's diet - My theory In-Reply-To: <20050423062749.6954.qmail@web8508.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127968 "crownless_aragorn" wrote: > 'What does Voldemort's diet consist of?' This is what we will try > to find out here. > > I can't imagine Voldemort eating `Mashed Potatoes'. We have seen > him talking potions from Wormtail to stay alive before his re-birth > ceremony. It is more likely that his diet consist of potions only. > It is also likely that all those potions are invented by him only. > Voldemort had taken certain steps because of which he didn't die > when the spell rebounded. The potions in his daily diet are one of > these steps. ....edited...... He didn't manage to find a > formula for `Elixir of life'. It seems that he has developed his > own formula for fighting death. It seems that Dumbledore agrees with > me too. > Valky: I definitely think that this suggestion has promise. There is a lot of canon that gives creedence such as Voldemort speaking to the DE's in GOF about not knowing which *experiment* had lead to him surviving the AK and also Severus Snape's first monologue in which he tells of potions that keep one, an inch from death, alive and the amazing wonder of potions as a whole. I have always agreed that both pieces of canon were a subtle clue to something important but I haven't yet seen a postulation thus supported by both. This one is. So lets suppose that Voldemort spent his ten years in hiding imbibing concotions made similarly to mimic the elixir of life, perhaps he himself even tried to make the Philosophers stone, but not having the grace to carry out the sacred task, and being in such a hurry to conquer the WW, just transferred half ready stones into a modified draught he concocted from 'some-other' concept and tried to bypass the whole process to get the desired effect. It could work in theory. The words potion and experiment pair up nicely, yes no? I imagine that there is at least one more piece of the puzzle that hasn't been fitted yet. I am sure that the Chamber of Secrets and Salazar Slytherin are something to do with it but what exactly, I am not sure. As for potions being Voldemorts main diet, I have to say, I think yes, foul tasting viscous substances and small animals are exactly what I expect him to be subsisiting on. urrrgh.. Good post uc-aragorn.. ! from Valky From BrwNeil at aol.com Sun Apr 24 00:04:36 2005 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 20:04:36 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP: Susan Bones - The Candidate Message-ID: <8d.25a24498.2f9c3c94@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127969 In a message dated 4/23/2005 6:45:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, jmrazo at hotmail.com writes: I am predicting that Susan Bones will get some air time in the next book. phoenixgod2000 Although anything is possible, I find it difficult to believe that his circle of close friends is going to stretch even further. The trio is now a sextet and I doubt it will go beyond that. As for relationships, don't be surprised if there aren't any firm ones until the epilogue. At age 17, teenagers have a tendency to distance themselves from friends when in a relationship. That would hurt the story. Think about Harry with any girl other than Hermione and we have taken Ron and Hermione out of the story. Remember this story is from Harry's point of view. Have Ron and Hermione in a relationship and Harry ends up a third wheel. Plus, again remember the story is from Harry's point of view. A Ron/Hermione relationship would be mostly behind the scenes. I feel that if Harry comes to the realization that he loves anyone, it will not be till the end of book seven. Now a question for the group in general concerning Hermione being in a relationship with either Harry or Ron. What makes one more plausible than the other? Many of the arguments I've heard against one pairing would apply equally to the other pairing. I'm not saying that Harry and Hermione belong together, but I would like R/Hr shippers to explain why they feel their relationship would work, but Harry and Hermione wouldn't. Neil [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From catlady at wicca.net Sun Apr 24 01:03:59 2005 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 01:03:59 -0000 Subject: Hermione's fun / Lupin / Aberforth / Shipping Susan Bones Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127970 phoenixgod2000 wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127856 : << Hermione is actually kind of a joyless character with little if any sense of humor. >> Hermione *must* have a playful sense of humor (altho' I have yet to see it in canon), because she is JKR's self-insertion character, and JKR's Potter writing displays tremendous playful sense of humor. She gave Hermione an otter Patronus because she herself would like to be an otter Animagus. Otters are excellent predators with fantastic fur, but they are primarily known for their playfulness; a person's Animagus form is a reflection of their personality; I think JKR's preference is very appropriate. << Ron's not going to be in Harry's marriage bed >> A pity, as Ron is clearly the personality best fitted to be life-partner to Harry. imamommy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127924 : << I absolutely love Hermione. She knows who she is and what she likes to do. No fun, you say? But to Hermione, SPEW is fun. Knitting elf hats is fun. Researching items of interest is fun, for Hermione. IMO, Hermione enjoys her passionate academic pursuits as much as the boys enjoy quidditch. >> I got the feeling that knitting elf hats was not fun for Hermione, but rather what she perceived as a matter of duty. Like Muggles giving blood ... most don't find it *fun* even if they do enjoy showing off their ten-gallon pin. I think she started SPEW out of an obsessive sense of duty / anger, not because she thought it would be fun, but discovered she enjoyed doing it. It is to be hoped that her enjoyment of being president of a society and giving the other members orders is not inextricably linked to the society failing to accomplish its goal. Potioncat wrote of Lupin in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127858 : << Bland? Like a fox maybe? >> Like a cat, maybe? Cuddly fur, loud purr, efficient killer. Finwitch wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127903 : << I hope we'll properly meet Aberforth Dumbledore, and find out whether he can read or not. That comment from Albus REALLY got me curious. >> I don't understand why so many listies don't share my certainty that Albus knows perfectly well that Aberforth can read perfectly well, and was just making a joke. "crownless_aragorn" wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127952 : << Susan Bones looks like the better one than the rest. It will be interesting to watch her and Harry alone and together. Susan Bones ? Any votes in her favour ? >> Not from me -- I ship Ron/Susan Bones. I think he really needs a smart, competent, quiet Hufflepuff girl/woman, regardless of the most un-quiet un-Hufflepuff girls (Hermione, Fleur, Madam Rosmerta) on whom he has childish crushes. From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sat Apr 23 18:19:32 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 18:19:32 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127971 Browsing JKR's quick quote/quill website I came across a quote from her stating that she and Trelawney worded the Prophecy very carefully. Checking OOTP page 841, I read and re-read the Prophecy (as I'm sure many before me have and I apologize if this has been overly discussed in the past - I'm new here). The Prophecy begins with "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches.....BORN to those.......as the seventh month dies (this is Neville). The Prophecy ends with "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord WILL BE BORN as the Seventh month dies (this is Harry). IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - they will join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. But mid-Prophecy it gets disturbing, "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...." The other is LV and either/neither refer to Neville and Harry. And (they) either must die at the hand of LV for neither (of them) can live while LV survives. I think that "Live" is not literal but "Live" as in live their life - choose a career they would enjoy (not one forced on them in able to fight against LV endlessly), marry, have a family, etc) while LV survives. Harry and Neville will survive but we'll all be on an emotional roller coaster before the end of Book 7. Can't wait! From tlpbupu at hotmail.com Sat Apr 23 19:25:30 2005 From: tlpbupu at hotmail.com (tlpbupu) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 19:25:30 -0000 Subject: HBP ... Anti-Predictions - Apparation & Age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127972 bboyminn: > > Further none of them have had any training in Apparation, > which we are told is a difficult and dangerous thing to do. I suspect > that training will come during the next (book 6) school year. > > Also, don't forget that even when Hermione and Ron are of-age, they > will still be at Hogwarts which you can't Apparate out of, and even if > they could, it would be against the rules, and there really isn't any > place to Apparate to. > > I suspect they will all take their Apparation training during 6th > years, so that they can all then take the test during the summer > between their 6th and 7th year. > tlpbupu Hi, long time lurker with a question about Apparating. As pointed out above you can't apparate out of Hogwarts, but you also can't apparate into or inside of it either. My question is, where do students learn this difficult form of magic? Does this class possibly take place in Hogsmeade? Since it is such advanced and dangerous magic there must be training involved. I mean I don't see students just reading up and practicing on their own, or even with adult supervison like you can to get a drivers licenes here in the US. Just random thoughts... Tracy From andrew at rgmm.co.uk Sat Apr 23 21:48:41 2005 From: andrew at rgmm.co.uk (andrewpepperuk) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 21:48:41 -0000 Subject: 100 years ago... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127973 I'm new to the list, but a few questions that've been in my mind since the first book are: If Voldemort is the worst wizard for a century, who was that worse wizard? Harry was the youngest quidditch player for a century. Who was the younger player? This century thing might be important as it was carried into the film version. I have no answers as yet! -Andrew From hells456 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 23 23:05:53 2005 From: hells456 at yahoo.co.uk (hells456) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 00:05:53 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Felix Felicis In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050423230553.86063.qmail@web26306.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 127974 I took 'Felix Felicis' to mean 'happiest of the happy'. I think it could be the incantation of the cheering charm, partly because of the meaning of the words, and partly because the inventor of the cheering charm was called Felix Sumerbee. I have no idea how this could be relevant to the plot, but I know there are several references to cheering charms in the books, ie. Hermione misses that lesson when using the time turner and they were tested on them in exams. BTW Hi I'm Hells, I'm new here and I look forward to reading more of your insights and theories. From chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 02:20:48 2005 From: chrisnlorrie at yahoo.com (chrisnlorrie) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 02:20:48 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127975 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > The Prophecy begins with "The one with the power to vanquish the > Dark Lord approaches.....BORN to those.......as the seventh month > dies (this is Neville). The Prophecy ends with "The one with the > power to vanquish the Dark Lord WILL BE BORN as the Seventh month > dies (this is Harry). IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - > they will join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. But mid-Prophecy it > gets disturbing, "And either must die at the hand of the other for > neither can live while the other survives...." The other is LV and > either/neither refer to Neville and Harry. And (they) either must > die at the hand of LV for neither (of them) can live while LV > survives. I think that "Live" is not literal but "Live" as in live > their life - choose a career they would enjoy (not one forced on > them in able to fight against LV endlessly), marry, have a family, > etc) while LV survives. Harry and Neville will survive but we'll > all be on an emotional roller coaster before the end of Book 7. > Can't wait! I have thought about this, too, but I didn't know how to word it without confusing myself! Thank you for putting it out there. I have to agree with you on this, because I just somehow feel that Neville is important in all this. Alora :) From greatraven at hotmail.com Sun Apr 24 03:03:28 2005 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 03:03:28 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's diet - My theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127976 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > > > > > As for potions being Voldemorts main diet, I have to say, I think yes, > foul tasting viscous substances and small animals are exactly what I > expect him to be subsisiting on. urrrgh.. > Sue: Also, snake venom, according to GOF!. He presumably drinks, rather than eats. (Wormtail offers him something - snake venom? - from a bottle in case he's still hungry) Yes, definitely urrgh! From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sun Apr 24 03:58:24 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 03:58:24 -0000 Subject: Hermione's fun / Lupin / Aberforth / Shipping Susan Bones In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127977 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Hermione *must* have a playful sense of humor (altho' I have yet to > see it in canon), because she is JKR's self-insertion character, and > JKR's Potter writing displays tremendous playful sense of humor. She > gave Hermione an otter Patronus because she herself would like to be > an otter Animagus. Otters are excellent predators with fantastic fur, > but they are primarily known for their playfulness; a person's > Animagus form is a reflection of their personality; I think JKR's > preference is very appropriate. I think that Hermione is a very repressed young woman who is so concerned about being proper that she never lets the child inside out. I have a student like her in one of my classes. I think the Otter is a sign that there is a fun person inside and Hermione needs to give herself permission to let it out. I hope she does before the end of the series, because I think I would like that girl. > << Ron's not going to be in Harry's marriage bed >> > A pity, as Ron is clearly the personality best fitted to be > life-partner to Harry. I agree with you here. Literally the only slash story I ever read that I enjoyed was Harry/Ron. unfortunately it was also Hermione/Draco, which scarred me emotionally :) > imamommy wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127924 : > > << I absolutely love Hermione. She knows who she is and what she likes > to do. No fun, you say? But to Hermione, SPEW is fun. > I got the feeling that knitting elf hats was not fun for Hermione, but rather what she perceived as a matter of duty. Like Muggles giving > blood ... most don't find it *fun* even if they do enjoy showing off > their ten-gallon pin. I agree with you here as well. Hermione never seems to me to be doing it because she like it, but because she believed she had the moral imperative to set the elves free. > "crownless_aragorn" wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127952 : > > << Susan Bones looks like the better one than the rest. It will be > interesting to watch her and Harry alone and together. > > Susan Bones ? Any votes in her favour ? >> > > Not from me -- I ship Ron/Susan Bones. I think he really needs a > smart, competent, quiet Hufflepuff girl/woman, regardless of the > most un-quiet un-Hufflepuff girls (Hermione, Fleur, Madam Rosmerta) >on whom he has childish crushes. That's the reason why I ship Ron/Luna in my fan fics. I think Luna's calmness and excentricity can help Ron with his prejudices and sometimes ass-like attitude (Plus she would be a lot of fun to date). I reserve Susan for Harry :) phoenixgod2000 From gwennie357 at msn.com Sat Apr 23 21:23:51 2005 From: gwennie357 at msn.com (Wendi Williams) Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 17:23:51 -0400 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127978 Steve/bboy wrote: > It's not simply a matter of an effective way to lure one or > the other into a trap. It's going to take some very special > and unique circumstances to cause the downfall of either Harry > or Voldemort. It's going to take some very special, unique, > and powerful magic to accomplish the job. > > This is what make the conclusion of the series so spectacular, > JKR, in a sense, has written herself into a corner, but placing > both key characters in a position where they can't actually be > killed. Yet, in the end, we know that one or the other must be > killed, or if not killed then so sufficiently vanquished as to > prevent them from ever being a threat again. > > That leaves us with one overriding heart-pounding sleepless-night > inducing question - HOW? I don't reply here often, but I just thought I'd mention something. Steve, you said that JKR has painted herself into a corner because effectively, neither Harry nor Voldemort can kill each other. You also said that logically, we know that one of them will have to. But what if it's not that at all? My theory is that there will be some sort of ultimate sacrifice on Harry's part -- a suicide, if you will, but disguised so that it doesn't read as such -- so that when Harry dies, Voldemort will as well. I think the prophecy, and prior history, has shown us that the fates of both are inextricably intertwined. Now personally, I'd have someone totally harmless (i.e. Neville or Luna or Madama Pomfrey) turn on Harry in the end (possible scenario: Neville killing him with some crazy plant), but then, I'm a sucker for melodrama ;o) Just joking everyone -- I don't want ANYONE to kill darling Harry. Not even himself. But that's what I'm most afraid of. gwennie From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sun Apr 24 02:44:11 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 02:44:11 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127979 >"B.G." wrote: > > IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - they will > > join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. But mid-Prophecy it gets > > disturbing, "And either must die at the hand of the other for > > neither can live while the other survives...." The other is > > LV and either/neither refer to Neville and Harry. And (they) > > either must die at the hand of LV for neither (of them) can > > live while LV survives. > Alora: > I have to agree with you on this, because I just somehow > feel that Neville is important in all this. Vanquish means to defeat or conquer. I think that Harry and Neville both have the individual power to vanquish LV. But for LV to die only Harry and Neville together have the power to accomplish that act. "Power of Two" "B.G." From bkalb at learnlink.emory.edu Sun Apr 24 04:47:50 2005 From: bkalb at learnlink.emory.edu (bkalb1977) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 04:47:50 -0000 Subject: JKR in "fiendish glee" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127980 So a while back, JKR had updated her site news with the "No News is Good News" heading and mentioned how at least once she was able to "rub my hands together in fiendish glee" (12-10-04). My question: what was this moment in HBP that caused her to rub her hands together in glee? I would guess it is some new revelation that she has been sitting on that would turn commonly-held views of the Potter world upside down... probably something to do with Snape? "bkalb1977" From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 06:51:08 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 06:51:08 -0000 Subject: HBP ... Anti-Predictions - Apparation & Age In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tlpbupu" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > > > > > I suspect they will all take their Apparation training during 6th > > years, so that they can all then take the test during the summer > > between their 6th and 7th year. > > > tlpbupu > Hi, long time lurker with a question about Apparating. As pointed > out above you can't apparate out of Hogwarts, but you also can't > apparate into or inside of it either. My question is, where do > students learn this difficult form of magic? Does this class > possibly take place in Hogsmeade? ...edited.. > > Just random thoughts... > Tracy bboyminn: Well, to Apparate you just need to step outside the front gate; it wouldn't be that hard to do. So, either it takes place just outside the grounds, or in Hogsmead. I suspect that once they have the basic theoretical principles down, they start by just Apparating five feet or so, then gradually extent the distance. Apparently there are several variables that must be considered when Apparating, I vaguely remember reading that the phases of the moon must be considered to accurately reach your precise destination. While I'm sure I read it, I've never been able to track that reference down again. In any event, I'm very eager for Apparation classes to take place so I can learn all the details. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 07:19:38 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 07:19:38 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127982 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > > >"B.G." wrote: > > > IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - they will > > > join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. ...edited... > > Alora: > > I have to agree with you on this, because I just somehow > > feel that Neville is important in all this. > B.G.: > > Vanquish means to defeat or conquer. I think that Harry and Neville > both have the individual power to vanquish LV. But for LV to die > only Harry and Neville together have the power to accomplish that > act. "Power of Two" > > "B.G." bboyminn: I'm not sure what the literary term is for this, but I would call Neville a 'sleeper'. Generally, a 'sleeper' is something bland and ordinary that catches you by surprise. For example, a very plain bland family sedan that has a monstrously large and fast motor. It's true power seems to come out of nowhere and catches you by suprise. I think Neville is very much involved in this and will play a key part in the final outcome. Although, I confess I don't know what part he will play. Although, I've speculated on a few things. -Harry and Nevilles /combined/ killing curses are needed to do Voldie in. Although, I really don't like the idea of either Harry or Neville killing Voldie clear and conscious intent and by direct willful action. I would prefer that it was through some secondary means, like making a building fall on him. -Harry or Neville directly sacrificing themselves to save the other which creates or re-enforces a Love Shield-like protection that ultimately causes Voldemort's death. -Alternate sacrifice in which Harry and/or Neville offer themselves up to save their many friends. Their willingness to sacrifice for love of friend imbues them with protection, that leads to Voldemort destroying himself in an attempt to destroy them. -The Veil - that damn Veil. I know it's important, but I haven't come up with a good Harry/Neville/Voldemort/Veil theory yet. No matter how you slice it and dice it, Neville is a 'sleeper', at the last moment, when you least expect it, he will jump in and prove himself in with great authority. Big Neville fan. Steve/bboyminn From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun Apr 24 09:23:01 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 09:23:01 -0000 Subject: Hermione's fun / Lupin / Aberforth / Shipping Susan Bones In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127983 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > > Finwitch wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127903 : > > << I hope we'll properly meet Aberforth Dumbledore, and find out > whether he can read or not. That comment from Albus REALLY got me > curious. >> > > I don't understand why so many listies don't share my certainty that > Albus knows perfectly well that Aberforth can read perfectly well, and > was just making a joke. > Hickengruendler: Because almost every time Dumbledore seemingly makes a joke, it turns out to be the truth. This started back during the Sorting in Harry's first year, when he said that every student who goes into the Third Floor is in danger of dieing a gruesome death. I grinned after this statement and so did Harry, but the students who knew him better did not and rightfully so. Dumbledore was absolutely serious. And then during the Yule Ball he said that even he didn't know all the secrets of Hogwarts and told Karkaroff (?) about the Chamber-Pot room, and again I thought he was making a joke. Comes OotP and we see again that he was serious. I can't remember a Dumbledore statement that didn't turn out to be the truth, (well, maybe that he saw a pair of socks in the Mirror of Erised, but even this could be the truth). Therefore I'm inclined to take most of Dumbledore's "funny" statements as the truth until proven otherwise. Hickengruendler From greatelderone at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 10:40:08 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 10:40:08 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > The Prophecy begins with "The one with the power to vanquish the > Dark Lord approaches.....BORN to those.......as the seventh month > dies (this is Neville). GEO: I don't understand why this would refer to both Harry and Neville rather than just one of the boys. > IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - > they will join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. GEO: I disagree with this. If it was indeed both Harry and Neville then why does the prophecy refer to them in the singular (the one) instead of say the plural(Ones). Besides think about it, Neville hasn't been marked by Voldemort in any form, he doesn't have the connection that Harry has to Voldemort and he hasn't shown to have the power to vanquish Voldemort, which I for one think is tied into the scar that binds both boy and Dark Lord and the fact that Voldemort was reborn with the use of Harry's blood and thus introduced a weakness into himself. Plus, look at how similar that Riddle and Harry are: half blood orphans raised by muggles. Their mothers certainly played significant factors in their existence, they were given the letter to Hogwarts and also the opportunity to join Slytherin House, which Harry ultimately rejected. If anything the similarities between Harry and Riddle most of them, which were caused by Voldemort's murder of Harry's family while trying to fulfill the prophecy just shows at least to me that Harry not Neville is the One here. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 11:02:07 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 11:02:07 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: . But we don't know for a fact, > that Voldemort specifically chose Potters first; they may have simply > been his first available opportunity. GEO: DD's spy in the Death Eaters most likely Snape told them that Voldemort was going after the Potters, which was why they did the whole business with the fidelius charm plus I believe Rowling herself confirmed that Voldemort picked the potters because of Harry's quality as a halfblood instead of the pureblooded Neville. Further, given that 'mark' has a > broad and general meaning, we don't know for a fact that the Prophecy > won't be fullfilled when, at some future point, Voldemort declares > Neville a threat and thereby /marks/ him. Nothing is fact, it's all > interpretaion. GEO: You seem to forget that Harry also has the power to vanquish Voldemort, which Voldemort knows not and which we have seen a demonstration of in the Ministry of Magic when he expelled Voldemort from his mind. Plus it was the same force that Voldemort underestimated and knows not that destroyed his first body in the Halloween of 1981, which ultimately helped in his rebirith in GoF and which I guess will ultimately allow Harry to destroy him forever. > As far as ONLY Voldy being able to kill Harry, I have implied that, > but the great mystery is that we know Harry is protected from being > killed by Voldemort GEO: Not anymore considering that Voldemort now has the blood protection within his veins and can touch the boy without suffering pain. > AND Voldemort is protected against being killed by > Harry, GEO: TO be exact, it seems that the Dark Lord is protected against being killed in general due to his immortality experiments. I think it more likely that Voldemort has introduced a crack in his immortality by using Harry's blood with the love protection of Lily to arise and be reborn again in GoF. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 13:09:09 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 13:09:09 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127986 Steve (bboymn) wrote: I limited the protection to death, because we have > already seen Draco curse Harry effectively, but these where schoolboy > harrassment curses. > Ginger: Help me out here, Steve. I've been racking my brain and can't remember a time when he does. I remember an "almost" curse that flew very close to Harry (resulting in the bouncing ferret) and the Serpensortia during the duel, but that was more creating a snake and sending it at Harry rather than cursing Harry directly. It seems like whenever he's about to, either a teacher appears or someone else steps in (the DA or F&G). Where's my memory when I need it? Ginger, the Perpetually Confused From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Apr 24 14:10:08 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 14:10:08 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127988 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > > Steve (bboymn) wrote: > I limited the protection to death, because we have > > already seen Draco curse Harry effectively, but these where schoolboy > > harrassment curses. > > > Ginger: > Help me out here, Steve. I've been racking my brain and can't > remember a time when he does. I remember an "almost" curse that flew > very close to Harry (resulting in the bouncing ferret) and the > Serpensortia during the duel, but that was more creating a snake and > sending it at Harry rather than cursing Harry directly. > > It seems like whenever he's about to, either a teacher appears or > someone else steps in (the DA or F&G). > > Where's my memory when I need it? > > Ginger, the Perpetually Confused Geoff: There are at least two.... 'Malfoy strutted over, smirking. Behind him walked a Slytherin girl who reminded Harry of a picture he'd seen in Holidays with Hags. She was large and square and her heavy jaw jutted aggressively. Hermione gave her a weak smile which she did not return. "Face your partners!" called Lockhart, back on the platform, "and bow!" Harry and Malfoy barely inclined their heads, not taking their eyes off each other. "Wands at the ready!" shouted Lockhart. "When I count to three, cast your charms to disarm your opponent - only to disarm them - we don't want any accidents. One... two... three..." Harry swung his wand over his shoulder but Malfoy had already started on 'two': his spell hit Harry so hard he felt as though he'd been hit over the head with a saucepan. He stumbled but everything seemed to be still working and wasting no more time, Harry pointed his wand straight at Malfoy and shouted "Rictusempra!" A jet of silver light hit Malfoy in the stomach and he doubled up, wheezing. "I said disarm only!" shouted Lockhart in alarm over the heads of the battling crowd, as Malfoy sank to his knees. Harry had hit him with a Tickling Charm and he could barely move for laughing. Harry hung back, with a vague feeling it would be unsporting to bewitch Malfoy while he was on the floor but this was a mistake. Gasping for breath, Malfoy pointed his wand at Harry's knees, choked "Tantallegra!" and next second Harry's legs had begun to jerk around out of his control in a kind of quickstep. "Stop! Stop!" screamed Lockhart but Snape took charge. "Finite Incantatem!" he shouted; Harry's feet stopped dancing, Malfoy stopped laughing and they were able to look up.' (COS "The Duelling Club" pp.143-44 UK edition) The first charm is not identified - we do not hear Draco's word of command. These two are just before the "Serpensortia" incident. From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 16:05:02 2005 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:05:02 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Susan Bones - The Candidate In-Reply-To: <8d.25a24498.2f9c3c94@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127989 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, BrwNeil at a... wrote: > > > In a message dated 4/23/2005 6:45:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, > jmrazo at h... writes: > > I am predicting that Susan Bones will get some air time in the next > book. > > phoenixgod2000 > > Although anything is possible, I find it difficult to believe that his > circle of close friends is going to stretch even further. The trio is now a > sextet and I doubt it will go beyond that. > > As for relationships, don't be surprised if there aren't any firm ones until > the epilogue. At age 17, teenagers have a tendency to distance themselves > from friends when in a relationship. That would hurt the story. Think about > Harry with any girl other than Hermione and we have taken Ron and Hermione > out of the story. Remember this story is from Harry's point of view. > > Have Ron and Hermione in a relationship and Harry ends up a third wheel. > Plus, again remember the story is from Harry's point of view. A Ron/Hermione > relationship would be mostly behind the scenes. I feel that if Harry comes to > the realization that he loves anyone, it will not be till the end of book > seven. > > Now a question for the group in general concerning Hermione being in a > relationship with either Harry or Ron. What makes one more plausible than the > other? Many of the arguments I've heard against one pairing would apply equally > to the other pairing. I'm not saying that Harry and Hermione belong > together, but I would like R/Hr shippers to explain why they feel their relationship > would work, but Harry and Hermione wouldn't. > > > Neil > Antosha: I agree with just about everything you have to say here. I can totally buy Susan--or Luna-- as a possible eventual love-interest for either Harry or Ron. Or Hermione, for that matter, though I don't think JKR's gonna go that way. :smirk: In any case, whether or not either one becomes involved with one of the Trio in this book, or whether it happens at the end of book seven, which I agree is the most likely case, given the elsewhere-discussed prominence of Jane Austen and Dorothy L. Sayers on JKR's virtual bookshelf, we can only expect this to happen if the two girls gain more prominence in HBP. I think the circle of friends will continue to expand. She's got us involved enough in those six DoM characters--their friends and romantic interests are likely to come into focus as well. I think this (in combination with the continuation of the DA) may be one of the ways that the so-called Good Slytherin makes his/her appearance--as one of the sextet's love interest. Or maybe I've just been reading too much fic. :double smirk: I did disagree with this one statement: "Think about Harry with any girl other than Hermione and we have taken Ron and Hermione out of the story. Remember this story is from Harry's point of view." If Harry becomes involved with Luna (who is interested in Ron and drives Hermione bonkers) you have a strain on the Trio, but Ron and Hermione would still remain forground. Likewise, if our hero becomes obsessed with Ginny (who is Ron's sister and Hermione's friend) there are all sorts of dynamics that are likely to come into play that will both strengthen and challenge the Trio. It's harder to see with a Harry/Susan pairing, but still possible. And, again, much fic hay has been made over the affect of a Ron/Hermione relationship on their friendship with Harry. Something just occurred to me: wouldn't it be interestingly Austenian to see the Trio all dating other people in HBP? Not necessarily the people they will end up with, but people who expand and challenge the central friendship in the series? Antosha, who is embarrassed to have spent so much time over the past few years trying to work out the love-lives of a group of fictional fifteen-year-olds From rochesteruponmedway at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 24 16:44:29 2005 From: rochesteruponmedway at yahoo.co.uk (rochesteruponmedway) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:44:29 -0000 Subject: Papal attack Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127990 I was absolutely appalled to read in a newspaper today that the new pope was attacking Harry Potter as "a subtle seduction which has deeply unnoticed and direct effects in undermining the soul of Christianity before it can really grow properly". Isn't it bad enough that the books are attacked by the Protestant right, but now the head of the Catholic church is joining in. It must be very distressing for JKR, a good Christian, to read such things. From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 16:59:03 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 16:59:03 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording - Neville's role in how it will all play out imho In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127992 hambtty Browsing JKR's quick quote/quill website I came across a quote from her stating that she and Trelawney worded the Prophecy very carefully. Checking OOTP page 841, I read and re-read the Prophecy (as I'm sure many before me have and I apologize if this has been overly discussed in the past - I'm new here). The Prophecy begins with "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches.....BORN to those.......as the seventh month dies (this is Neville). The Prophecy ends with "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord WILL BE BORN as the Seventh month dies (this is Harry). IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - they will join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. But mid-Prophecy it gets disturbing, "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...." The other is LV and either/neither refer to Neville and Harry. And (they) either must die at the hand of LV for neither (of them) can live while LV survives. I think that "Live" is not literal but "Live" as in live their life - choose a career they would enjoy (not one forced on them in able to fight against LV endlessly), marry, have a family, etc) while LV survives. Harry and Neville will survive but we'll all be on an emotional roller coaster before the end of Book 7. Can't wait! tinglinger ---------- You might be interested in reviewing my Trichotomy theory which I posted here in http://groups.yahoo.dom/group/HPforGrownups/message/105955 and which I updated and expanded in potterplots http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots/message/3 and added references to The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots/message/18 From musicofsilence at hotmail.com Sun Apr 24 17:49:03 2005 From: musicofsilence at hotmail.com (lifeavantgarde) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 17:49:03 -0000 Subject: Papal attack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127993 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rochesteruponmedway" wrote: > > I was absolutely appalled to read in a newspaper today that the new > pope was attacking Harry Potter as "a subtle seduction which has deeply > unnoticed and direct effects in undermining the soul of Christianity > before it can really grow properly". Isn't it bad enough that the books > are attacked by the Protestant right, but now the head of the Catholic > church is joining in. It must be very distressing for JKR, a good > Christian, to read such things. Stefanie inquires: Can you provide a source for this? I just a news search for any indication of this being said and the only search results coming up were those from 2003 when Pope John Paul II said that Harry Potter is not detrimental or averse to the Christian faith. I've seen no quotes from Pope Benedict XVI, and to tell you the truth, I really don't think commenting on Harry Potter is top on his list of priorities in his first week of papal duties. If you have a source for this news report, please post it. Stefanie, who is addicted to primary sources. From rochesteruponmedway at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 24 18:19:31 2005 From: rochesteruponmedway at yahoo.co.uk (rochesteruponmedway) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:19:31 -0000 Subject: Papal attack Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127994 Stefanie inquires: Can you provide a source for this? It was reported in today's Sunday Mirror. It is not apparently a new item of news, since it dates back over two years, when he was still a cardinal. According to the article, he was re-acting to a book "Harry Potter - Good or Bad" written by the conservative sociologist Gabriele Kuby. As you say, he has probably got more important things to worry about now, but it is a bit surprising in view of the fact that John Paul II praised JKR for living her life like a Christian. Here is a link, if you would like to check. news at sundaymirror.co.uk From rochesteruponmedway at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 24 18:25:36 2005 From: rochesteruponmedway at yahoo.co.uk (rochesteruponmedway) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:25:36 -0000 Subject: Papal attack Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127995 Sorry, that link didnt come out. Try again. news at sundaymirror.co.uk From pegruppel at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 18:37:13 2005 From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 18:37:13 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127996 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: >> Voldemort's Shield- > > We don't have details, but we know Voldemort has spent his whole adult > life pursuing and experimenting with protections against death. > Further, we know that one of more of these has, to some degree, worked. > > > Now combine this new concept of Prophecy Shield with the protections > that both Harry and Voldemort originally each uniquely had, and you > have two extremely hard to kill people. > > Let me expand this by asking a question, if you were a general wizard > or a Death Eater, give that Harry couldn't be killed by the strongest > Dark Lord in a century, and given that the attempt by said wizard > rebound and generally destroyed said wizard, would you want to be the > next person to attempt to kill Harry? > > Just on the original vanquishing of Voldemort by baby Harry alone, I > can't imagine that any one is too eager to put Harry's vulnerability > to the test. I certainly wouldn't want to be the first. > > Now in terms of the End Game, the conclusion of the story, things have > gotten a little sticky. It's not simply a matter of an effective way > to lure one or the other into a trap. It's going to take some very > special and unique circumstances to cause the downfall of either Harry > or Voldemort. It's going to take some very special, unique, and > powerful magic to accomplish the job. Although, perhaps the key is > that to 'vanquish' either, the solution is to NOT use magic; for one > to kill the other by non-magical means; think Colt 45, the Arch/Veil > of Death, or even Sword of Gryffindor. > > This is what make the conclusion of the series so spectacular, JKR, in > a sense, has written herself into a corner, but placing both key > characters in a position where they can't actually be killed. Yet, in > the end, we know that one or the other must be killed, or if not > killed then so sufficiently vanquished as to prevent them from ever > being a threat again. > > That leaves us with one overriding heart-pounding sleepless-night > inducing question - HOW? > > Just a thought. > > Steve/bboyminn Now Peg: Well, my take on Voldemort's "protected" status is way back in the messages: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/121546 A quick summary--Lord Thingy is a magical construct, not really "alive" in the usual sense. The prophecy has been fulfilled in part because of the rebounding AK. The real issue isn't how to kill him (he's dead where he stands, in a sense), rather, it's how to undo the spells holding him together. Because of the constraints of the Prophecy, as stated by JKR in the person of Sibyl Trelawney, Harry is only vulnerable to AK at the hands of LV. LV is dead already (Oh, Harry didn't have a direct "hand" in the curse? Prophecies are notoriously vague on details.) Other curses by other people will work, but because of the structure of the action nobody except LV will get to try to cast AK at Harry. Remember the end of GoF, when Fake!Moody was about to cast the AK and was interrupted by DD? Hmmm . . . Food for thought, what if Barty Jr. *had* managed to articulate the curse? Is it the power of the Prophecy (working through the structure of the story) that prevented him? I know this isn't a point-by-point response, but Steve's post just prompted a few random thoughts on my part. Peg From greatelderone at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 19:11:09 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:11:09 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127997 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Peggy" wrote: > > Now Peg: > > Well, my take on Voldemort's "protected" status is way back in the > messages: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/121546 GEO: I agree with you that Voldemort has probably externalized a part of himself in order to gain his limited immortality however I would disagree that he has sacrificed his entire soul, but rather that he got rid of his heart or the part of his being that could love, which would fall in line with Rowling's comments about Voldemort being what he is because he has never loved or cared for anyone, Dumbledore's comments that the power that Voldemort knows not is the love within Harry, which we know he has underestimated in their very first encounter and which in OOTP allowed Harry to exorcise Riddle from his mind and also finally would explain Dumbledore's gleam of triumph after Harry told him that Riddle had used his blood laced with magical protection and probably love to rise again. > A quick summary--Lord Thingy is a magical construct, not > really "alive" in the usual sense. The prophecy has been fulfilled > in part because of the rebounding AK. GEO: How so? The prophecy said that Voldemort or Harry would die at the hand of the other and Voldemort didn't fall at Harry's hand, but rather through a combination of his own magic and the sacrificial magic that was invoked after he murdered Lily. > what if Barty > Jr. *had* managed to articulate the curse? Is it the power of the > Prophecy (working through the structure of the story) that prevented > him? GEO: Perhaps more like the laws of the story or the hand of the writer that prevented him from accomplishing it. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 19:13:02 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:13:02 -0000 Subject: Nel Question # 6. Peter Pettigrew Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127998 Alla: I hope it is OK that I am posting it one day earlier than I was supposed to. Thanks to Potioncat for being a wonderful proofreader and simply for being wonderful. :-) Dr Nel's original question: Consider the character of Wormtail (aka Peter Pettigrew). What motivates him? When Harry is upset that he saved Pettigrew's life, Dumbledore says, `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.' When Harry says he doesn't want a bond with Pettigrew, Dumbledore replies, `The time may come when you will be very glad you saved Pettigrew's life.' (POA, pg 311). Does Pettigrew telling Voldemort that his return to power could be accomplished without Harry Potter (GoF, pgs 13-14) seem motivated by a desire to help Harry or by Pettigrew's cowardice? What will his role be in the remaining novels? Will Pettigrew remain Voldemort's faithful servant? Will he help Harry? Are these questions complicated further by Sirius Black's suggestion in Chapter 19 of POA that other Death Eaters might turn against Pettigrew? My follow ? up questions. I believe that we know very little about motivations behind Peter Pettigrew's actions, therefore the majority of the questions, while based on canon, are quite speculative, due to limited information. Here we go. 1. `Although every society, large or miniscule, can change the meaning of betrayal, it is political circumstances that bear down most heavily upon our reliability. Of all extenuating circumstances, the pressure of military force is the most irresistible. Fear of persecution makes all of us potentially treacherous. Who is to condemn the Soviet citizen who shuts his door and heart to a dissident who once was his friend? It is the self-righteous, far more than the craven, who are unjust. Public fear, even more than personal circumstances, makes us treacherous; and it also excuses us, because danger summons us to look out for ourselves and our families. Heroism is very rare, and no one is obliged to rise to such heights. When someone does, he is being praised precisely for being more than merely good" ? "Ordinary Vices" by Judith Shklar. Do you think that this quote is in any way, shape or form applicable to Peter Pettigrew's circumstances? In your opinion, did he owe to his friends to be "more than merely good" or not? Sirius in the Shack tells Peter that he should have died just as they would have died for him. Would they? 2. In her well known quote JKR talks about Peter as someone who out of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the strongest person. " Q. : You referred to the darkness in your books, and there's been a lot of talk and even concern over that. JKR: You have a choice when you're going to introduce a very evil character. You can dress a guy up with loads of ammunition, put a black Stetson on him, and say, "Bad guy. Shoot him." I'm writing about shades of evil. You have Voldemort, a raging psychopath, devoid of the normal human responses to other people's suffering, and there ARE people like that in the world. But then you have Wormtail, who out of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the strongest person. What's very important for me is when Dumbledore says that you have to choose between what is right and what is easy. This is the setup for the next three books. All of them are going to have to choose, because what is easy is often not right." (Entertainment Weekly, September 7, 2000) Is that really all that there is to Peter? Is that the only reason he befriended James, Sirius and Remus? Is that why he joined Voldemort? 3. What is your stand on "Peter as Dumbledore's spy" theory and all the variables from it? 4. As we all know Peter's finger was sent to his mother. Where is his father? Do you think his mother may show up in the later books or not? 5. So, why did Peter end up with Weasleys of all people? 6. Sirius in the Shack accuses Peter of passing information to Voldemort for a year. How did Sirius know for how long it happened? Is it because Dumbledore started getting suspicious a year before Potters death? Any other reasons? 7. If Peter will indeed help Harry at the end, do you see it as conscious help or "a la Gollum"? 8. JKR in 2004 answered the question "What happened to Wormtail"? As "You will find out in book 6". What we will find out? Please look at the last question by Dr. Nel. Do you think that the issue of other Death Eaters being angry with Peter is now moot for discussion or not? Is it a possibility that Peter was hurt by his esteemed colleagues and was recovering during OOP? Here are some post OOP Peter related threads http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127566 - Mterman compared Umbridge and Pettigrew personalities http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126713 - Nora wondered about Peter's ambiguous role in the narrative http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/125645 - Snow wonders about Pettigrew's life debt and what it means for all involved parties http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118386 "Two Wormtails" Pippin speculates that Peter may not be the only one who has the nickname "Wormtail". The thread requires the working knowledge of ESE! Lupin theory. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/118201 - "Unfortunate! Peter" Kneasy argues that Peter could be Dumbledore's spy http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/115540 "DD and the rat" ? Kneasy argues that Peter could be Dumbledore's spy. The whole thread is very interesting, IMO. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/107238 "New JKR FAO Poll" ? Lauraasia wonders why answer to question "Where was Peter in OOP?" could be important to the plot. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/104011 - Carol argues against the theory that Peter is not a real Death Eater. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/99014 - Mike wonders who approached Peter with the offer to spy against the Order. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/95879 - Carol thinks that Peter could have been responsible for more deaths than just Potters and muggles or there was another Voldemort spy in the original order http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/95203 "Is Wormtail an Occlumens?" by Eric Oppen http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/91754 "Where is Pettigrew?" ? Jen Reese and other posters offer ideas about possible Peter's whereabouts in OOP. Have fun! Alla, who thinks that attempting to feel some kind of sympathy towards Peter was the hardest "book related" exercise of her senses she ever did. :-) For a complete list of the discussion questions, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Discussion% 20Summaries/ For the schedule, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/125653 From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 19:24:49 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:24:49 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 127999 Just to add a little more confusion to that already addressed. "There are others ways to destroy a man" Didn't DD say that? There is a concept in the spiritual life (or Religious Life) that to become one with God and the instrument of God's Love one must *die to self*. This is a form of death. Not physical death, but an emotional, psychologically, philosophically and spiritual *death*. A death of the ego. A death of the *me, me, me*. This is one way that LV can die in us all. (And I think that whatever else JKR may be doing, she likes the subliminal, speak directly to the subconscious, type of stuff.) Also there are many way to defeat someone without killing them. Many have observed that the books are a chess game. Checkmate does not necessary mean that the king is dead. Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 19:56:25 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:56:25 -0000 Subject: Papal attack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128000 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rochesteruponmedway" wrote: > > Stefanie inquires: > Can you provide a source for this? > > It was reported in today's Sunday Mirror. It is not apparently a new item of news, since it dates back over two years, when he was still a cardinal. According to the article, he was re-acting to a book "Harry Potter - Good or Bad" written by the conservative sociologist Gabriele Kuby. As you say, he has probably got more important things to worry about now, but it is a bit surprising in view of the fact that John Paul II praised JKR for living her life like a Christian. Tonks: I could not follow the link either. But it doesn't matter, since that article was 2 years ago. Since then the church has investigated the books and said that they were OK. And if Pope Benedict XVI is the theologian that we are told that he is, he will be able to see this as well. I am not worried. The HP books are Christian literature in the style of Lewis and Tolkien. If we can see it plainly, I am sure that a learned theologian like Pope Benedict XVI will be able to see it as well. I am not worried. Tonks_op From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sun Apr 24 20:53:55 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 20:53:55 -0000 Subject: Nel Question # 6. Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128001 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla: > My follow ? up questions. > I believe that we know very little about motivations behind Peter > Pettigrew's actions, therefore the majority of the questions, > while based on canon, are quite speculative, due to limited > information. > Here we go. > > 1. Heroism is very rare, and no one is obliged to rise to > such heights. When someone does, he is being praised precisely for > being more than merely good" ? "Ordinary Vices" by > Judith Shklar. > > Do you think that this quote is in any way, shape or form applicable to Peter Pettigrew's circumstances? based on the way I read PoA, I think Peter was captured, tortured and broken by Voldemort. Someone with as weak an ego as Peter wouldn't last too long under someone who could pick through your brain, use crucio, and who knows what else. I think he had to potential to resist, he was a gryffindor after all, bravest of the brave, but he failed to live up to his potential. Peter Pettigrew is a contemptible tragedy, imo. >In your opinion, did he owe to his friends to be "more than merely good" or not? Yes, because he shouldn't have been in the order if he wasn't able to be 'more than merely good'. > Sirius in the Shack tells Peter that he should have died just as > they would have died for him. Would they? I think they would have. I've always been of the opinion that the bond between all of the marauders, including PP, was much stronger than a lot of people give credit to. > 2. But then you > have Wormtail, who out of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the > strongest person. What's very important for me is when Dumbledore > says that you have to choose between what is right and what is easy. > This is the setup for the next three books. All of them are going to > have to choose, because what is easy is often not right." > (Entertainment Weekly, September 7, 2000) > > Is that really all that there is to Peter? Is that the only reason > he befriended James, Sirius and Remus? Is that why he joined > Voldemort? I think it really has to do with Peter being broken by Voldemort. I don't think he would have turned traitor if he hadn't been twisted by him. He seems like the type to really give his loyalty to his friends out of gratefullness because he doesn't have a lot of friends. bottom line, I don't think that Peter joined V willingly. I think he was somehow forced or twisted into joining the death eaters. > 3. What is your stand on "Peter as Dumbledore's spy" > theory and all the variables from it? unlikely. > 4. As we all know Peter's finger was sent to his mother. Where > is his father? Do you think his mother may show up in the later > books or not? we probably won't see either of his parents, but it would probably be a powerful scene if Harry was to meet Peter's mother. > 5. So, why did Peter end up with Weasleys of all people? weird luck? > 6. Sirius in the Shack accuses Peter of passing information to > Voldemort for a year. How did Sirius know for how long it happened? > Is it because Dumbledore started getting suspicious a year before > Potters death? Any other reasons? Maybe the war started to turn sour for the order in a way that led to the belief of a spy within the order? > 7. If Peter will indeed help Harry at the end, do you see it as > conscious help or "a la Gollum"? I think it will be a conscious redemptive act on Peter's part. > 8. JKR in 2004 answered the question "What happened to > Wormtail"? As "You will find out in book 6". I'm not even going to attempt to guess :) > Have fun! I will not and you can't make me! > Alla, who thinks that attempting to feel some kind of sympathy > towards Peter was the hardest "book related" exercise of her > senses she ever did. :-) see, I actually have more sympathy for peter than I do for, say, Snape or Draco, because of my (somewhat supported) fanwank that Peter was broken by Voldemort and twisted into becoming a death eater. phoenixgod2000 Warning: This post has been heavily influenced by Star Wars and the Revenge of the Sith novel From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 23:47:13 2005 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:47:13 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?SHIP:_The_Harry=92s_True_Girlfriend_Litmus_Test_(was:_Susan_Bones_-_The_Candidate)?= In-Reply-To: <20050423062108.37791.qmail@web8510.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128002 >From the company that brought you the magnificently-crashed Randomized Prophecy Decoder and the never-launched HBP Identifier, this time it's for you SHIPpers: here is the ultimate test for identifying Harry's True Girlfriend. Just choose your favorite candidate and award her points according to the sections of the test, and you'll get her final score, which you can then compare with the score of the other candidates. For advanced (read: the Terminally Obsessed) shippers - you can conduct the test for each book separately. This way you'll also get the development of the candidate chances through the series. (note: for convenience the candidate is referred to as "she" and "her" throughout the test, but according to the shipper's tendencies it can refer to either gender and even non-humans. I don't discriminate) The Test: 1. Did Harry show any romantic interest in the candidate... like kissing and dating her? [award your candidate 10 points] like only have his heart doing summersaults when she's around? [8 pts] like asking her to a ball? [6] but only because the first one he asked wasn't available? [3] like thinking she's pretty [2] like just noticing her look [1]. 2. Did Harry show platonic interest in the candidate... like hanging with her all the time? [4] like saving her life [3] but only because it was The Right Thing To Do [2] and he didn't actually save her because another guy already did? [1] 3. Did the candidate show any romantic interest in Harry... like kissing and dating him? [7] like hopelessly admiring him? [5] like watching him in the prefects bathroom? [4] like going to a ball with him? [3] but only because he was a school champion? [1]. like kissing him on the cheek in socially-acceptable circumstances? [2] but she also kissed another guy in those same circumstances? [0] well she would have kissed the other guy too but couldn't because he was unfortunately unconscious at the time [ok, make it 1]. 4. Did the candidate show any platonic interest in Harry... like hanging with him all the time? [4] like helping him or supporting him when it's not the popular thing to do? [3] like torturing him in socially-acceptable circumstances? [2] but she also tortured another guy in those circumstances [0] well she would have tortured the other guy too but couldn't because she didn't have a spare quill [1]. 5. Did the candidate show any romantic interest in other guys than Harry... that are handsome naked centaurs? [subtract 3 pts] that are in Harry's year? [-2 for each guy] and are Harry's best friend? [-5] that are older than Harry? [-3 for each] and are very cool? [-4] that are older than Harry but dead? [-2]. that are MUCH too old for her? (Lockhart counts) [-1]. 6. Did other guys show romantic interest in the candidate... and they're in Harry's year? [-1 for each] and are Harry's best friend? [-5] they're older than Harry? [-2 for each] they're older AND better at Quidditch? [-4] but she doesn't care about Quidditch? [-7 for unsuitability] 7. Did the candidate show jealousy about other girls who are interested in Harry... that she only thought are interested in him? [1pt for each other girl] that are really interested in him? [2 for each] that YOU think are interested in him but aren't really? [1 for each] that are actually interested in another guy that she's also might be interested with? [-3 for each]. 8. Did other guys that were interested in the candidate showed jealousy about Harry... because she's really interested in Harry? [3 for each other guy] because they only think she's interested in him ?[1 for each] but she actually really IS interested in him only she doesn't know it yet, but they can tell [2] but he's not really interested in her [1] yet they suspect he might become interested in her if he realize that she is interested in him, only she doesn't know it yet but they do [this section is canceled because my chain of logic just broke]. 9. Did the candidate try to make Harry jealous by dating other guys [nope, I think I won't even start on that one] 10. Is the candidate suitable for Harry... like they would be happy together for the rest of their life?[8] but there's the small problem that she's a bit older than him? [that's ok] no, like really, REALLY older [-1 for each year of difference] she'd be right for him but with constant nagging [-20] she'd be right for him but I can't stand her [20] she'd be right for him but I can't stand her family [10] she's the only one who knows what he went through [2] she has a French accent [5] but it's an annoying French accent [-7] she's right for him because she's a true Gryffindor [4] she's right for him because she's not a Gryffindor [4] we don't know anything about her, but she could be right for him [3] she's a ghost, but she'd be right for him if he's dead by the end of the series [2] she's a bird, but she might be an animagus [1] she's not even in the series yet, but she'll be the younger sister of the Half-Blood Prince [0.000001] If you haven't lost track yet, sum up the points for your candidate and prove that she scores more points than the competition. Neri, with humble apologies to Merlin Missy for stealing from her Mary Sue Litmus Test http://missy.reimer.com/library/marysue.html From crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in Sun Apr 24 05:20:20 2005 From: crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in (Subhash Sane) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 06:20:20 +0100 (BST) Subject: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater Message-ID: <20050424052020.2417.qmail@web8506.mail.in.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128003 Hello to all of you. Today we?ll talk about a character that will definitely be a character to watch in sixth book. I am not too sure whether he will be there in seventh book or not. The person whom I am referring to is none other than ?Percy Ignatius Weasley?. Let us look at the journey of this young wizard till book-5. He is highly ambitious. He wants to be one of ?THE PREFECTS WHO GAINED POWER?. Ron had correctly pointed out that Percy would do ANYTHING for a bit of power. He just hates for being poor. His father neither holds any higher post in the Ministry nor has much INFLUENCE, RESPECT in the Ministry. Arthur Weasley had never sacrificed his moral values for a bit of GOLD. That?s why he didn?t get that bit of GOLD. This fact even applies to our muggle world where people of Gryffindor nature stick to one place only without giving up and without giving away moral values and on the other hand, Slytherin natured people just go higher and higher and become rich, famous by sacrificing their moral values if it is the need of the hour. This is how it is. Though Percy was in Gryffindor, he was more Slytherinish. He hated his father for not giving up THAT ATTITUDE. He started living alone and away from his brothers, in his own room because of the fact that they were also supporting his father and mother. The attitude of ?Why can?t I have something that he/she has? Why I own everything is rubbish?? His affection towards his mother and father existed till his parents take care of everything he wanted. We have seen in the first few books that Mr. and Mrs.Weasley tried to satisfy his needs, which were possible for them. But Percy wanted much much more than that. The relationship between Percy and his parents became more and more turbulent. Day by day, he was becoming more and more rebellious. He wanted to get out and build his own world, build his own identity at any cost. He was seeking for opportunity, for an excuse to get out and fortunately for him, he got one. His parents believed Dumbledore and Harry and tuned to join him and at that time, he knew that his time has come at last. So, he left his parents and joined the hands with those people who can give him a bit of power. But after a year, his all dreams just crashed like a castle of playing cards. Cornelius Fudge was proven guilty for his acts. The rising of Voldemort was ?BREAKING NEWS? for the rest who earlier, didn?t believe Dumbledore and Percy lost his one source of getting powerful i.e. Fudge, Minister Of Magic. Percy didn?t come back at the end of book-5, which suggests that he is still in a shock. His parents must have tried to contact him after the truth about Voldemort came out in public. What is the state of mind of Percy Weasley right now? One part of him must be telling him that it is entirely his fault and he must apologise for it. But the second part of him is telling him not to surrender because going back to his parents will bring back all that suffering because of which he got out of the house. So, he is in dilemma right now. Now, here comes the role of Lord Voldemort who is an excellent talent hunter and thus, in need of recruiting more and more people in death eaters? squad. He will come to know about Percy from Lucius Malfoy who has observed Percy and understood his state of mind. Now, many people in HMC will argue that though Percy hasn?t acted well for the past one year, he certainly will not join Voldemort. Even Percy won?t be thinking to join Voldemort. His real nerves are not allowing him to join evil side. Unfortunately, he is one of those Voldemort is after. Many years have passed and Voldemort wants to regain his lost political strength and manpower. So, he will definitely look for new talents. He will look for those types of persons who are mentally weak, innocent (like Snape, Regulus Black etc.). Percy Weasley will definitely prove to be one of the most important people for him. So, he won?t wait for Percy to join for he knows Percy will never do that. He will set the plot in which Percy will proven to be a death eater. He will start telling and proving through his plots that Percy is working for him. He will make sure that everyone believes this and when it will be a dead-end for Percy, Lord will make his final move by contacting him and promising him to take him out of this ordeal if he will work for him. Dumbledore may believe that Percy is innocent but there is Ministry, Media and all other people who will be forced by V not to trust Percy anymore. Thus Dumbledore will be helpless too. This is what Lord Voldemort?s modus operandi is. Voldemort is the hunter and Percy is the hunted. It all depends on Percy, Dumbledore Arthur & Molly Weasley now. Let us be optimistic and hope that Percy will come back soon. We all want to see you with your parents. Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partneronline. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in Sun Apr 24 05:45:21 2005 From: crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in (Subhash Sane) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 06:45:21 +0100 (BST) Subject: Two ways of Defeating Voldemort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050424054521.89612.qmail@web8510.mail.in.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128004 At the end of Order Of The Phoenix, we saw Sirius disappearing behind the veil and he did not come back. This is one of the way by which Voldemort can be killed. If Harry manages to send Voldemort behind that veil, even Voldemort can't come back. Even the protection given by the experiment in the past won't save him from the death. Perhaps, Harry is the only person who can come back from that veil. So, this is one of the ways of defeating Voldemort. Salazar Slytherin created the Chamber of (many) secrets and left. So far, we know only one secret. Keeping a basilisk to lure muggles out of Hogwarts may just be a trap to hide the other secrets which are residing in that chamber. Only heir of slytherin can have an access to this room. But, according to the prophecy, Harry was also given the power to open that room and see what's inside. At that time, saving Ginny was more important. So, Harry fail into trap and ignored other details. I don't think Harry needs to get anywhere outside the school. Chamber of secrets will provide him the answer to the RIDDLES. Chamber of secrets may be storing the knowledge of how to kill slytherin's heir and other important information about the heirs. But due to the fact that only the slytherin's heir will be able to know abt. his destruction, nobody succeeded in knowing these facts.Harry has been given this power to discover these facts. Let's see when he discovers this fact. Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partneronline. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 14:58:07 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 14:58:07 -0000 Subject: Another dumb question--Halloween? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128005 The HP Lexicon has it that James and Lily Potter were killed on October 31. That's barely possible, given that the story in book one begins on Tuesday, and we find out that Guy Fawkes Day (November 5) is "next week", but I can't find a canon reference to the date of the Potters' murders, nor can I find it in the JKR interview mentioned aa a source. Does anyone know where this information comes from, or is it a bit of plausible (bad things always happen to Harry on Halloween!) fanon? Amiable Dorsai From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 15:16:46 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 15:16:46 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128006 bboy: > > < protection is Universal, or is it unique to Voldemort.>> > Phyllis: > I don't think this is clear. In Ch. 37 of OotP, Dumbledore tells > Harry "While you can still call home the place where your mother's > blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by *Voldemort*" > (my emphasis). This would suggest that the protection is unique to > Voldemort, but in PoA, no one seemed concerned about Harry's safety > after Sirius' escape from Azkaban until he ran away from Privet > Drive. So presumably there was some thought that Harry was safe from > someone other than Voldemort (in this instance, Sirius) while at home > (where he is protected by a charm that uses the spilling of Lily's > blood to protect him). I've long had the idea that Harry's protection at Privet Drive extends not just to Voldemort, but to Voldy's agents, as well. Otherwise, the protection isn't really worth much--"Say Lucius? Be a dear and pop over to Little Whinging for me, please." That would be why, if it's true that no one was worried before Harry left PD (we only see Harry's POV, and we *know* things where hidden from him) they weren't worried about Sirius--they thought he was one of Tommy's Toerags, and hence, unable to touch Harry in Petunia's home. Amiable Dorsai From imontero at iname.com Sun Apr 24 17:26:43 2005 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 17:26:43 -0000 Subject: "A Little Romance" / Teamwork In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128007 Stefanie writes: > Mmm, except for the fact that when Harry immediately opens the door > to Hermione's voice, "[t]here [is] snow in her hair and her face > [is] pink with cold." Bits of conversation are alluded to later in > the chapter, but unless she, Ron and Ginny planned really, really > quickly, I don't see how your scenario can be plausible, especially > as support for a 'shipping theory. > > Also with the information that Hermione give us a bit later: > "Ron's mum has lit a fire in there and she's sent up sandwiches." > it seems a bit more likely that Molly wrote to Hermione and planned > out this bit in a letter. Figure this: If Hermione were to just > burst through the door and march right up to Harry's room, only > someone who was already in on the idea (or who had somewhat > requested her arrival) would've been able to prepare a room that > quickly. snip... > I think that's a silly notion, also. Obviously they all help him. > However, it is worth noting that while Harry was taking "savage > pleasure" in keeping himself in his room and is shown ignoring both > Sirius's happy caroling and Molly's soft calling, he answers the > door to Hermione without any hesitation. That is a noted difference > in reaction -- he has pretty much spiteful behavior towards two > characters who are arguably his mother and father figures. We see no > effort on Ginny and Ron's part to come and get him, and see Harry > feeling that Grimmauld Place is worse than Privet Drive. Quite > dismal, really. While Hermione isn't the only one who is able to > help him overall (Harry *does* have good friendS), why try to > discount a simple fact: 'shippy or not 'shippy, Harry responds to > Hermione without hesitation. > Luna: Are you sure about Molly writing to Hermione, I'd rather say it was Ron? Granted, Molly might have known that Hermione was coming and arranged to lit a fire and made sandwiches while Hermione was on her way to Grimmauld place, but this is only an assumption, we don't see this happeneing in the books and there could be a hundred different explanations... The facts as presented in the book show that there were already a fire, sandwiches, Ron and Ginny in Ron's room waiting for Harry indicating that some kind of planning was made before hand. We have some facts that seem to contradict each other: the snow in Hermione's hair and the facts that I mentioned above. The facts mentioned above, IMHO, bear more relevance than Hermione having snow in her hair. I think this was a way of speacking, figurative language... Remember that Hermione knocked Harry's door "a few minutes later." Snow melts instantly when you get inside a more or less warm place (I would know that, I live in Canada;-)) Snow doesn't last a few minutes in your hair without melting (maybe 40 seconds to a minute?). Hermione wasn't wearing a cloack or a coat (which indicates that she took the time to take it out). We know that you can magic a fire and magically preprare sandwiches. We also know that Umbridge is screening all mail that go to Hogwarts... Somehow I don't think that they were able to explain so much and plan it all before Hermione got there. Probably Ron wrote to Hermione telling her to come to his place for Christmas. My guess is that there were no les than 5 minutes from Hermione's arrival to her knocking Harry's door. That was enough time to arrange it all (in a magical world). Then, we have the element of surprise. Harry wasn't expecting Hermione. Read the scene again, She knocks hard on Harry's door, Harry opens the door and the first thing he says is "What are you doing here?" "I thought you were skiing with your mun and dad?" Harry was expecting anyone in the house to knock his door and he was prepared to ignore them (Ron and Ginny were aware of this). He wasn't expecting Hermione. So he opens the door out of surprise, then it's too late, Hermione has already started talking to him and told him about the sandwiches and the fire. We know for a fact that Harry was hungry like a dog. Hermione didn't need to insist too much on him leaving the room. So, I don't believe that Harry opening the door to Hermione and ignoring Molly and Sirius is an indication of "something going on" between them. In anyway I see it, this whole business bears no shippy elements whatsoever. > snip > > If you read the discourse in the moment which Hermione is in Harry's > room, her intent doesn't seem to be to "cheer him up" -- she doesn't > attempt to do that, her mission is to get Harry out of the room and > into a discussion. I don't think it's a slight on Hermione's > character that she is pretty much determined to get him out of the > room he's been associating with his isolation and into a room with > two other people who he seems to trust. After Hermione enters > Harry's room, she tells him why she's there and leads him into the > other room -- involving Ron and Ginny isn't some show of how inept > she is at relating to Harry. I think it's a reflection, as others > have said, on the strength of the friendships that are later > solidified as the six emerging from the DoM. > Luna: Excatly! I was asnwering to a message were someone wrote that Hermione was "the only one" to deal with Harry's dark moods (or something along those lines). BTW, I am not claiming (and I never have) that Hermione is "inept" in the way she relates to Harry... I was putting into perspective this scene to show that Hermione didn't do it all alone. I think that Hermione and Harry's frienship is and always has been very solid. I don't see how this scene shows that their friendship is getting more solid than what it already is. If something, Ginny's role in the scene did came as a surprise as I think very few of us remembered that Ginny had gone through a possession experience in COS when we first read this scene. > snip > > At this point, Hermione's nearly 16 and Ron's 15...even if they were > romantically inclined (which I most certainly do not buy) it really > doesn't make much sense for either the Grangers or the Weasleys to > invite her to spend vacations because of that -- especially since > Hermione's presence at the Weasleys has been alluded to in previous > books. Honestly, especially with the less-than-sexually-forward (not > that they'd be shagging, but having one's girlfriend stay over for > an entire vacation does not really seem Arthur and Molly) culture of > the Wizarding World, I don't find this a believable theory. It makes > much more sense to go with the reasoning given in the books. > Hermione's not been over the Weasley's all that often: the summer > before 4th year for the QWC she arrived only a day earlier than > Harry, she spent what we gather as most of the summer at OotP HQ > (which to me speaks more of Voldemort's rising than romantic > involvement), and spends Christmas in the episode we've discussed. > > "keeps on spending"? Hmm... > > Stefanie, who naught but two hours ago geeked out a purchased a JKR > biography from good ol' B&N Luna: At least the last two (summer OOP and Chirstmas OOP) she spent them with Ron and Ron's family. That's a fact, that's canon. Why? I don't know, she could have waited to meet them in the train and spend the summer vacations with her parents. She was safe with them, I guess. Ron might have invited her to help in Grimmauld Place, as there was so much cleaning, etc, to do. You might be right, it could speak of Voldemort rising... The fact is that she does spend more off Hoghwarts time with Ron than with Harry. If, as some people point out (you might not agree with them too), Ron and Hermione have such a hurting a terrible relationship; how can we explain Hermione spending extra-Hoghwarts time with the person that annoys her the most! About the Christmas episode. Do you honestly believe that she went to Grimmauld place with the "only" intent to "save Harry?." Do you honestly believe that she wasn't also thinking of Ron's family situation, and that Harry as much as Ron would be needind her support? From ayaneva at aol.com Sun Apr 24 19:32:11 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:32:11 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Wording And Killing Harry For Fun Combined - Was "Prophecy Wording" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128008 hambtty > Browsing JKR's quick quote/quill website I came across a quote from > her stating that she and Trelawney worded the Prophecy very > carefully. Checking OOTP page 841, I read and re-read the Prophecy > (as I'm sure many before me have and I apologize if this has been > overly discussed in the past - I'm new here). tinglinger: > :::snip::: > I think that "Live" is not literal but "Live" as in live > their life - choose a career they would enjoy (not one forced on > them in able to fight against LV endlessly), marry, have a family, > etc) while LV survives. Harry and Neville will survive but we'll > all be on an emotional roller coaster before the end of Book 7. > Can't wait! Hi tinglinger! It's been a while since I posted, but I've been mulling over the whole "live" part of the prophecy as well. I'm with those who honestly can't see how Harry can come out of this alive. However, that belief, personally speaking, has little to do with the wording of the prophecy itself; it's more of a logical conclusion than anything. I know there have been several discussions of stuff like, the definition of a hero, heroes in classical literature, and what literary examples might have influenced JKR. (I'm desparately trying to find one of those actual threads to link to, but Yahoo refuses to cooperate) But definitions aside, I think a really easy example of one of Harry's literary predecesors is Frodo from LOTR. And look how Frodo ended up; he was so screwed up after suffering such an impossible burden that he eventually had to just up and leave our world altogether. A "happy ending" just doesn't make any sense to me, especially if Harry is a tragic hero. After everything that Harry's been through, and will go through, I just don't see how it's possible. Unless Harry gets a really strong 'Obliviate,' after all is said and done, I think it actually seems kind of cruel for him to live and be forced to pick up the pieces. We've got emotional, psychological, and physical torment. And he still has two more books in which to suffer. True, since I'm comparing him to Frodo, one could argue that Frodo didn't die either, and so can't be called a classical tragic hero, thereby implying that Harry doesn't necessarily have to die. However, Frodo did basically "die" in the sense that he left the world entirely; perhaps it could be called a literal journey to the light at the end of the tunnel and a place that always sounded kind of like the traditional concept of heaven. Therefore, his near disaster with the ring in the end would be a fatal flaw. And something just suddenly occurred to me. Veering off for a moment... In the last bit of your post, you make a distinction between the literal "live" and the more abstract idea of "live." I never actually considered the two definitions of the word. Well, what if you have the abstract "live," which necessarily requires the literal "live." You can't go ride a bike or have a family if you're not breathing. But you can literally be "living" and not actual be "living" in the abstract sense of the word. Meaning, you're breathing, but that's about it. And living without living, IMO, is just as good as being dead. You're living, but you're not alive. So, if Harry truly fits the classical tragic hero mold, meaing that he's pretty much going to die, but his fate can't violate the prophecy, then the living without being alive takes care of that without a problem. That's assuming, of course, a very specific (and slightly abstract) notion of what it means to be "dead" and what it means to be "alive." Or we could make it really simple and just have Voldemort win. Or this scenario: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127530 AyanEva From sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk Sun Apr 24 20:30:59 2005 From: sandra87b at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Collins) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 20:30:59 -0000 Subject: How does the WW fit into the MW? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128009 I mentioned this question in a reply to someone's reply to one of my points about Hogwarts, and I'd love to know people's thoughts in response to it (and please, no more bad tempered personal emails just because I like wondering about the WW and MW). Here goes: After re-reading book two the other night (well, flicked through it) I'm having trouble figuring out what parts of the WW are accessible (either visually or physically) to muggles, and what parts only exist through hidden doorways. For example, even though the Hogwarts Express leaves from a magical hidden platform in some kind of parallel world, Harry and Ron could chase it in their car. They didn't go through any magic gateway... or if they did, I must have missed it, and Ron must be far more magical and 'switched on' than I thought. Besides, the car could be seen in the muggle world, and must have brought the Weasley clan from somewhere, but if that 'somewhere' was a hidden WW place, what was the point of interacting with the muggle world? Following the thought a step further, they would have arrived in a normal region of the UK - which is presumably concealed on the usual maps? Concealing it on paper is one thing, but a back-packing muggle could still stumble across it, surely? And if Hogwarts is standing on British soil, does that mean the whole WW is spread around the UK (and other countries) - yet never seen by muggle-eyes? Perhaps the concealment may be due to bizarre spells or enchantments, but that's a little ineffective and rather stretching things a little, I would have thought? But if that's the case, would these places be visible and accessible to muggle students who go to Hogwarts, especially outside of school terms, in case for example, Harry and a pureblood decided to met up one holiday at the pureblood's house? Travelling by flue power would involve the muggle using hefty magic outside the school... and what if the Dursleys don't have a great huge fireplace with an enormous flue? So to go a step further, would a muggle Hogwartonian like Hermione or Harry easily find the parts of the UK where purebloods (or any) witches and wizards live? The reason I mention this is that I don't think JKR has ever made the co-existence of the two worlds particularly clear - is it a parallel world accessed via doorways which take a person from the MW to the WW (in which case the whole car thing in Book 2 was a little odd), or is the WW all around the muggles but they just can't see it? And if it's a bit of both, do some live hidden in the muggle world whereas others have the luxury of living in the parallel world? This has always made me wonder, ever since book one. The enchanted kind of door in the first book that Hagrid led Harry into the WW for the first time, to Diagon Alley, was part of a city located either parallel to the muggle world, or just rendered un-noticeable to muggles. Oh my head. And then this leads onto the questions regarding why the WW would need such a link with the muggle world. After all, as we showed with all those ideas about the point of Hogwarts (thanks everyone), the two worlds don't have a fat lot in common. Sandra (kind of confused, here) From ayaneva at aol.com Sun Apr 24 21:28:08 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:28:08 -0000 Subject: Things I like/hate about HP - was Re: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128010 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > > In the interest of saying some positive things about HP I have > composed a partial list of things I like about Harry Potter. Enjoy > > 1. Harry is an awesome character. > > 2. Animagi are a neat concept. > > :::snip a bunch::: > > 22-29. Fleur Delacour. I have a crush on her something bad. The > combination of sexy accent and unearthy beauty? How can I resist? > > 30. The world of Harry Potter is so interesting and so filled with > promise I'm going to be writing fan fic for that world for the rest > of my life. > > phoenixgod2000 out! I'm really late and wrong but I want to add my lists in too! So, without further ado, here are all of the things that I like about Harry Potter. The ones that I can remember anyway. I'll warn you now that this is long. 1) Severus Snape, first and foremost. (Yeah, I'm sticking up for him) I don't like him in the least, but I do love him. My favorite characters aren't necessarily the ones that I actually like, but the ones that are complex and contradictory. I'm just dying to get inside their heads and see what makes them tick because they're behavior is so unlike that which would be considered "normal." Which usually means, I end up liking the darker characters and then I'm thoroughly disappointed that they've died in the end. For instance, I actually like Darth Vader because he was far more complex than Luke Skywalker (could anyone be more whiney?!) *shrugs* 2) In Book 5, the excellent characterization of Harry Potter as a grumpy teenaged boy who's been through some ish. It was an excellent bit of writing; even if I did hate Harry by the end of the whole thing; I still haven't read Book 5 again! Of course, I don't really hate Harry, but he was irritating like none other. 3) Also, Book 5 is a great set-up for the next two books. Look at all of the issues and questions it's inspired on HPFGU! Not to mention, new insight on old questions. It keeps the party going. 4) All of Book 4. I LOVE that book. It was adventure, action, mystery, but most importantly, that's when things really took a turn to the dark side. I mean, sure Book 3 is when it begins, but Book 4 is when you know that there's no going back. 5) HPSS/HPPS. That's where it all began! That's also when Hogwarts and Harry were wide-eyed with wonder and carefree: Before the latest prophecy and before Cedric or Siriu 6) Albus Dumbledore, both pre and post-OOTP. Cheerful old bat in the first 3 books, hints of something else by the end of the 4th book, and manipulative and unforgiving in Book 5. Unforgiving as in, he does what he has to do to win the war, even if it means sacrificing a few people. I detest that sort of ruthless thinking, but I don't see what choice they really have. Voldemort's certainly not going to take a time-out so that Harry can have a bit more time to get himself together. 7) Tom Marvolo Riddle. No, not Lord Voldie, but Tom. It was really cool to see a bit of what he was like as a student in Book 2. I find it memorable, but of the vast difference and subtle similarities between Tom and Voldie. 8) Pre-OOTP rivalry between Harry and Draco. It was fun! Now Draco just comes off as childish. 9) Draco. See Severus Snape. There has to be more to Draco than what we've seen. I want to know what it is! What's his relationship with his father, what does he really think? All of the fanfictions out have raised so many interesting possibilities for all of the characters. I want to see if any of them play out. 10) Pre-OOTP Harry. When he wasn't so irritating that I wanted to smack the crap out of him. 11) Ron Weasley. He's you're everyday kind of guy. He'll rise to the occasion, but he's not super-smart like Hermione and not a wonder-boy like Harry. He's just Ron and very refreshing because of his average-ness. If anyone from the US watches the Disney Channel (yes, I'm 21 years old and I still watch the Disney Channel) there's a show on there called Kim Possible and she has a side-kick named Ron Stoppable who reminds me a lot of Ron Weasley. The description that the commercials give is "Kim Possible: The girl that can do anything! And Ron Stoppable: The boy that might do something!" It's not meant in a mean way, it's just elucidating the juxtaposition between Ron Stoppable and Kim Possible. Or in this case Ron Weasley and Harry Potter/Hermione Granger. (Sorry for that random "elucidating" and "juxtaposition": I couldn't think of any other way to phrase what I meant) Ok, we'll leave the list of "Things That I Like" at 11 items because I've still got to fit "Things That I Don't Like." So, here now, are "Things That I Don't Like About HP." 1) Vying for first place are Sirius Black and Luna Lovegood. We'll do them one at a time. I hate Sirius because I think he was something of a bad influence on Harry. He's reckless, impulsive, arrogant, and has a wild temper. Wait. Before you say, "Well, you like Snape and he was the same personality traits," I know. But here's the difference: Snape has many more layers than Black. Severus Snape's complexity redeems him. If Black had had something more head-scratching than the fact that he opted out on his family's dark tendencies, I'd probably be quite a fan. He doesn't. I like him for a short moment in Book 3 when it looked like Harry would be able to live with him. I was happy for Harry. And I didn't always hate Sirius Black. I used to like him, until I found that Snape intrigued me more. It's hard to like both Sirius and Severus at the same time, so somewhere along the way, I ended up switching sides. And now for Luna. I don't really have a reason for hating Luna, but I do hate her with a passion that rivals my hatred for Sirius. I think part of it is that I see her as an outside threat to the Trio. I don't want anyone to be added to the Trio. Neville's OK, because he was there from the get-go. I mean, he was involved even from Book 1 when Hermione stunned him after he tried to stop them from leaving the dorms after hours (I hope I got the right book). And because I've grown to generally like Hermione, although she does snoop around way too much, I don't like the threat that Luna poses to Hermione in replacing her as Harry's counsel (see end of Book 5). I found myself irrational in my intent to side with Hermione in every confrontation between her and Luna. Which is funny, because I think that's the point that JKR is trying to address. The dismissal of things that don't appear logical isn't always beneficial. It's a good point to make, but I still hate Luna, the irritating prat. 2) Post-OOTP Draco. He's become a bit one-dimensional and irrelevant in this book. I want to see more of Draco and I think things might get interesting since Lucius is in Azkaban. 3) Static Ron. Ron's character didn't evolve in Book 5, so now he's a bit out of kilter with Harry, Hermione, and Neville. He's got the same problem as Draco's character. Sirius became a bit of a static character as well and he died. I'm really hoping this isn't an omen. If Ron died I'd cry because his character had so much potential and I really like him. I always thought that Ron got left out quite a bit. If Draco dies, it won't be a big loss, but it will be disappointing that JKR didn't do more with him. 4) Lord Voldie. He was a disappointment as far as super-villains go. C'mon, his grand plan is to lure Harry to the ministry and attack with a bunch of bumbling Death Eater who can't even best a bunch of kids. The initial Freddy Krueger-ish part of his plan was pretty clever, with the fake visions and all of that, but then it just got stupid. 5) The Baby-Headed Death Eater in the Ministry. That was unbelievably creepy and disturbing. For some reason, it still bothers me. 6) So many as yet unanswered questions! It's really going to drive me crazy. Of course that's also what I like about the books, but anyway. 7) James Potter. I don't hate him, but I'm very disappointed in MWPP-era James. While I wasn't all that surprised because I'm of the belief that what Snape says usually has some buried grain of truth, I did expect James to behave better while in school. I mean the Trio breaks rules, but usually for beneficent, or at least benign, reasons and they don't go out of their way to pick on people. Harry is certainly not like his father was in school. *chides Severus for continually believing that Harry is* 8) Nymphadora Tonks. I don't hate her so much as distrust her. I can't quite put my finger on it, and maybe it'll turn out to be nothing, but I wouldn't let her near any sensitive information. 9) Argus Filch. OMG that man drives me crazy. Although, in the movies Mrs. Norris is super cute. I'm a cat person (I even named one of my kitties "Draco"; unfortunately for her, my kitty is a girl. I wasn't allowed to name her sister Severus because the opposition hates the character of Severus Snape but was a bit more ambivalent towards Draco Malfoy. Out of revenge, I named her Party Boy.) 10) Without a doubt, the Dursleys. Can a bunch of people be any more unlikable? Although, I want to know more about Petunia growing up with Lilly, how much she knows about the wizarding world, and what transpired between her and Dumbledore. 11) Godric's Hollow. Just how did Lilly Potter sacrifice save Harry from Voldie's curse? I'm sure plenty of other parents jumped in front of their kids when the death eaters came charging; they didn't survive. Why was this time different? And did James die that night? In the movie, that scene that was specifically left in, whose arm is that? It can't be James', he was already dead. I remember JKR saying that the key to the whole series is in Book 3, I think it has to have something to do with Godric's Hollow. There's just so information that could be hidden there. Whew! And now my list is done! I'm interested to know if I'm the only one that doesn't like Luna Lovegood. I seem to be in the minority! AyanEva From willsonkmom at msn.com Mon Apr 25 01:55:50 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 01:55:50 -0000 Subject: Nel Question # 6. Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128011 "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > based on the way I read PoA, I think Peter was captured, tortured and > broken by Voldemort. Someone with as weak an ego as Peter wouldn't > last too long under someone who could pick through your brain, use > crucio, and who knows what else. Potioncat: What exactly in PoA makes you think that? If Peter was "the" spy, he was working for quite some time. If it was torture or threats that made him betray his friends, why didn't he tell someone at the time? Or why didn't he go to DD afterwards? I could buy Imperius as a reason, except again, I would have expected him to talk to DD during his many years at Hogwarts. question and Phoenixgod's answer: > >In your opinion, did he owe to his friends to be "more than merely > good" or not? > > Yes, because he shouldn't have been in the order if he wasn't able to > be 'more than merely good'. Potioncat: I agree with this. Even within the framework of membership of the Order, there is "what is expected" and "above and beyond" It appears that Peter fell very far short of the expectations. And although I snipped Alla's very nice quote about persecution, keep in mind that JKR values courage above everything. She would expect someone to owe his friends more than being merely good. Alla's quote from JKR: What's very important for me is when Dumbledore > > says that you have to choose between what is right and what is > easy. > > This is the setup for the next three books. All of them are going > to > > have to choose, because what is easy is often not right." > > (Entertainment Weekly, September 7, 2000) Potioncat: For example, perhaps: Occlumency, both teaching and learning; Staying put at 12 GP; Keeping your head down, or not; joining the DA. Alla asks: > > Is that really all that there is to Peter? Is that the only reason > > he befriended James, Sirius and Remus? Is that why he joined > > Voldemort? > Phoenixgod: bottom > line, I don't think that Peter joined V willingly. I think he was > somehow forced or twisted into joining the death eaters. Potioncat: You know, I just realised we don't know if there were any other boys in Gryffindor that year. Currently we see Ron/Harry, Seamus/Dean, and Neville. Neville is friendly with the other four, but not a full part of either pair. Who else did Peter have? Was he part of the group because there was no other choice? And if he was the type to shadow a "protector" if you will, was the friendship surviving adulthood? If he continued to be something like the younger Peter, was there anything in common with the other 3? I could see LV having a slow subtle influence on Peter, convincing him perhaps that the Marauders weren't really his friends. By LV, I mean of course, a person of LV's choosing. > > Alla, who thinks that attempting to feel some kind of sympathy > > towards Peter was the hardest "book related" exercise of her > > senses she ever did. :-) Potioncat, who hopes she isn't sending a reply too late at night to make sense. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 02:30:32 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 02:30:32 -0000 Subject: Nel Question # 6. Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128012 Phoenixgod2000 wrote: based on the way I read PoA, I think Peter was captured, tortured and broken by Voldemort. Someone with as weak an ego as Peter wouldn't last too long under someone who could pick through your brain, use crucio, and who knows what else. Potioncat: What exactly in PoA makes you think that? If Peter was "the" spy, he was working for quite some time. If it was torture or threats that made him betray his friends, why didn't he tell someone at the time? Or why didn't he go to DD afterwards? I could buy Imperius as a reason, except again, I would have expected him to talk to DD during his many years at Hogwarts. Alla: I am afraid I agree with Potioncat. I mean not that the torture is not a possibility, it sure is, IMO, because too many gaps are not filled yet. Nevertheless, so far in the text I see no proof to that. Wouldn't you think that Peter would try to justify his wrongdoings to Sirius and Remus by very different words than what he actually used? Peter does not say - he( Voldemort) made me do it, etc,etc, etc.... He says instead: "He - he was taking over everywhere!" gasped Pettigrew. "Wh- what was there to be gained by refusing him?" - PoA, p.374, paperback. I read this quote as Peter having time to figure out that joining Voldemort will be to his gain, not simply joining him under extreme duress. I mean it is a possibility that Voldemort could have threatened with torture, I guess, since the next thing that Peter says is : "You don't understand! whined Pettigrew. "He would have killed me, Sirius!" - p.375. Still, I get the impression (which could easily be wrong) that Peter joined willingly. Alla earlier: In your opinion, did he owe to his friends to be "more than merely good" or not? Phoenixgod: Yes, because he shouldn't have been in the order if he wasn't able to be 'more than merely good'. > Potioncat: I agree with this. Even within the framework of membership of the Order, there is "what is expected" and "above and beyond" It appears that Peter fell very far short of the expectations. And although I snipped Alla's very nice quote about persecution, keep in mind that JKR values courage above everything. She would expect someone to owe his friends more than being merely good. Alla: Oh, I agree that Peter owed his loyalty to Potters and others as fellow members of the resistance, no question in my mind. What I was getting at, I guess, was more personal level of loyalty? In particular, the dismissive attitude of James and Sirius in the pensieve scene. As I said many times, I have many problems with Pensieve scene ( subjectivity, incomplete, etc.) Nevertheless let's suppose that James and Sirius always treated Peter that way ( no, I don't realy believe it, but let's play a hypothetical). To make a long story short let's suppose that James and Sirius simply were not very good friends with Peter and just simply took him under their wing, because they wanted his admiration. Let's also suppose that Peter was not a member of the Order, but simply their friend. Do you think that under such circumstances Peter owed them his loyalty? I know, it is getting too speculative, but I am still wondering. Alla asks: Is that really all that there is to Peter? Is that the only reason he befriended James, Sirius and Remus? Is that why he joined Voldemort? Potioncat: Who else did Peter have? Was he part of the group because there was no other choice? And if he was the type to shadow a "protector" if you will, was the friendship surviving adulthood? If he continued to be something like the younger Peter, was there anything in common with the other 3? I could see LV having a slow subtle influence on Peter, convincing him perhaps that the Marauders weren't really his friends. By LV, I mean of course, a person of LV's choosing. Alla: Very good point. I really want to know when Voldemort started recruiting, really. :) I also want to know who was that person who approached Peter. Malfoy again? Alla, who thinks that attempting to feel some kind of sympathy towards Peter was the hardest "book related" exercise of her senses she ever did. :-) Phoenixgod: see, I actually have more sympathy for Peter than I do for, say, Snape or Draco, because of my (somewhat supported) fanwank that Peter was broken by Voldemort and twisted into becoming a death eater. Alla: Oh, please don't get me wrong. IF we will learn that Peter was tortured and /or he joined under threat of violence to his family, he will definitely become more sympathetic character for me. Since we don't know for sure, it is VERY hard for me to sympathize with the character who directly contributed to making Harry and orphan. I was very surprised by you mentioning Draco here. Had I ever even hinted at sympathising with him? :-) Just my opinion of course, Alla From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 09:06:25 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 09:06:25 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128013 > SSSusan: > You know, that part ["either MUST die at the hand of the other"] > just leaves me confounded. Here's why I have trouble with it. If > ONLY Voldy can kill Harry, then why is DD worried about Harry in > Quidditch, in the TWT, etc.? > > More importantly for me, and bearing on the series' end... if ONLY > Harry can kill Voldy **and** ONLY Voldy can kill Harry, then does > that lock us in to a scenario at the end where both have to die? > I know I certainly prefer to have Harry defeat/kill Voldy but to > live himself. But if that were to happen, then how would Harry > *ever* die, if his death MUST come at the hand of Voldy? > > Or is that where the distinction of "to die" and "to be killed" > comes in? Only Voldy can KILL Harry, but he can DIE in any number > of ways -- an accident, of old age, of illness, etc.? mz_annethrope: "Must" means having an obligation to do something because of custom, law, contract, whatever. An example of "must" is when fake Moody enters Harry's name into the goblet of fire. Even though he didn't volunteer himself, Harry must compete because wizarding custom requires him to do so. Likewise Harry is obliged to kill Voldemort and Voldemort is obliged to kill Harry if one or the other is to live. That doesn't mean it will actually happen, though it had better! I'll be sorely vexed if JKR provides us with a tame ending. Anyway, what I'm meaning to say is that the thrust is obligation, not certainty. mz_annethrope (who is up way too late to be thinking clearly) From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sun Apr 24 12:27:34 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 12:27:34 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128014 > > B.G.: > > The Prophecy begins with "The one with the power to vanquish > > the Dark Lord approaches.....BORN to those.......as the seventh > > month dies (this is Neville). > > GEO: I don't understand why this would refer to both Harry and > Neville rather than just one of the boys. The Prophecy ends with "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord WILL BE BORN as the Seventh month dies (this is Harry). JKR stated in an interview that, "She and Trelawney worded the Prophecy very carefully". There are two - THE ONE BORN as the seventh month dies and THE ONE WILL BE BORN when the seventh month dies. "B.G." From hambtty at triad.rr.com Sun Apr 24 15:25:50 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 15:25:50 -0000 Subject: Slytherins - evil or ambitious? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128015 While registering for a HP conference recently, I was asked to complete a questionaire to be sorted into a House. I expect to be in Gryffindor or Ravenclaw but don't take it too seriously as it is all in great fun. I'd proudly wear the Hufflepuff colors as well but I'm probably not mild tempered enough. Then the question came, how would I feel to be placed into Slytherin? I'd never really thought about Slytherin except for it's place in the books. Slytherins are ambitious and some are overly so but evil? They are "cunning and will use any means to achieve their ends" (JKR). Malfoy uses Goyle and Crabbe to get what he wants. Goyle and Crabbe get what they want by using Malfoy. Others may use various means including wealth, intellegence, strength, the list is endless. Loyalty and friendship are not biggies in this House but I'm sure they exist. This thought process brings me back to the books: Some of the Slytherins will join with the other Houses as a means to meet their ends. What ends? Survival without going over to the Dark Lord. "B.G." From jaanise at hello.lv Mon Apr 25 01:10:57 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:10:57 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] What would disappoint you about HBP? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54933$a32c0ce0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128016 -----Original Message----- From: lupinlore I saw this question on another site and thought I'd try it out here. What would disappoint you should it happen/not happen in HBP? -------------------------- Jaanis: I haven't really thought about this, I think I would like anything that comes as long as it is Rowling. Any great disappointment could be only in case there is something very not like her, and that is quite unlikely it'll happen. Especially after she said that she likes the 6th book herself very much. There could be some surprises or some boring parts, but not really disappointing. Except if Dumbledore dies, as even if it is quite feasible, he's my favourite character. :) I don't really worry for many other events mentioned here that could be disappointing, or even think wether they would disappoint me, because I simply don't think they'll happen. Like it being a big dream in the end or Siriuss coming back alive. From DANCERWH86 at aol.com Mon Apr 25 01:03:36 2005 From: DANCERWH86 at aol.com (DANCERWH86 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:03:36 -0400 Subject: Papal Attack In-Reply-To: <1114387475.5391.98111.m22@yahoogroups.com> References: <1114387475.5391.98111.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <8C71749BE5365DF-4C4-3181@mblk-d32.sysops.aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128017 Ok so I went to look for the article and here's a link I found to the story. http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/new%20pope%20hits%20out%20at%20harry%20potter%20books Yes he does thank an author for pointing out the hidden agendas behind the book. But I'm not really surprised. It isn't the first thing the Vatican has been against and I doubt it will be the last. They were also against the film A League of Their Own and Four Weddings and a Funeral, The Name of the Rose and many other films/books etc..(Source: The documentary, Hollywood vs. Catholicism which I saw in Religion class at my catholic high school). Now I'm a catholic, but I disagree with these statements as many will. The books though do talk about witchcraft which most church organizations will deem anti-christian. But that doesn't make the literature any different. I mean, I live in a place where there are still arguments about teaching Darwinism and those people will probably condemn Harry Potter based on that statement. But personally even as a devout, church-going catholic, this statement doesn't change my view of JKR's material. Just a thought though and a personal opinion as always. Lindsay ~~~~~ I once saw a forklift lift a crate of forks. And it was way too literal for me! ~Mitch Hedberg From greatelderone at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 03:15:21 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 03:15:21 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128018 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > There are two - THE ONE BORN as the > seventh month dies and THE ONE WILL BE BORN when the seventh month > dies. GEO: That means absolutely nothing. It's just common repetition that we see in all of Trelawney's prophecies. IT WILL HAPPEN TONIGHT. 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 HE WAS. TONIGHT... BEFORE MIDNIGHT...THE SERVANT...WILL SET OUT...TO REJOIN...HIS MASTER.... By your reasoning perhaps there was another servant that set out that day in PoA to rejoin Voldemort. And interesting enough, you seem rather intent in ignoring the overwhelming amount of evidence that shows Harry not Neville is the One. Is it so important that he has to be a prophecy child in order to play a part in the story when he already has enough reasons to be against Voldemort? From poppytheelf at hotmail.com Mon Apr 25 03:29:28 2005 From: poppytheelf at hotmail.com (Phyllis) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 03:29:28 -0000 Subject: Another dumb question--Halloween? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128019 Amiable Dorsai wrote: > The HP Lexicon has it that James and Lily Potter were killed on > October 31. That's barely possible, given that the story in book one > begins on Tuesday, and we find out that Guy Fawkes Day (November 5) is > "next week", but I can't find a canon reference to the date of the > Potters' murders, nor can I find it in the JKR interview mentioned aa > a source. It's canon - see Ch. 4 of PS/SS, where Hagrid tells Harry "All anyone knows is, he turned up in the village where you was all living, on *Halloween* ten years ago" (my emphasis). The Lexicon makes it clear that there are many discrepancies with the dates in the series - with regard to the reference to Bonfire Night, specifically, it says: "'Perhaps people have been celebrating Bonfire Night early -- it's not until next week, folks!...' Actually, it can't be. If November 1 is on a Tuesday, November 5 will be the Saturday of that same week. Jim is a bit addled from all the owls and shooting starts, perhaps." See: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/books/ss/rg-ss1.html ~Phyllis From theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 25 03:49:08 2005 From: theotokos_8679 at sbcglobal.net (theotokos) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 20:49:08 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050425034908.92703.qmail@web81610.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128020 IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - > they will join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. GEO: I disagree with this. If it was indeed both Harry and Neville then why does the prophecy refer to them in the singular (the one) instead of say the plural(Ones). Besides think about it, Neville hasn't been marked by Voldemort in any form, he doesn't have the connection that Harry has to Voldemort and he hasn't shown to have the power to vanquish Voldemort, which I for one think is tied into the scar that binds both boy and Dark Lord and the fact that Voldemort was reborn with the use of Harry's blood and thus introduced a weakness into himself. --------------------theotokos This line of thought got me thinking. In C38 of OOTP when the kids are in the hospital wing, Madame Pomfrey says something about thoughts leaving deeper scars than physical wounds. She is referring to Ron being attacked by the brain in the DOM. But, we know Neville has some pretty severe scarring as a result of his parents condition. GOF and OOTP dedicated some poignant moments to it. This could be used to support the Neville sleeper position and the power of two. I am not saying I believe it, but I am one of those who think Neville is destined for great things. Theotokos [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 03:58:38 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 03:58:38 -0000 Subject: Papal Attack In-Reply-To: <8C71749BE5365DF-4C4-3181@mblk-d32.sysops.aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128021 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, DANCERWH86 at a... wrote: > > Ok so I went to look for the article and here's a link I found to the story. > > http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/new%20pope% 20hits%20out%20at%20harry%20potter%20books > Tonks: I looked at the story. I do not see his source. I tried to e-mail him, but the page did not load so I could not ask him. I find it highly unlikly that the new Pope would, as one of his first orders of duty, make a statement about Harry Potter. So that article can not be correct. I want to know the source and date of this information and the whole context. This was one sentance taken out of context. I just don't believe it. Show me real proof from a valid source. If it is true I will write to the Pope myself. The pope has e-mail you know. Course he probably doesn't read it, but the last time I wrote to a VIP who I thought would never read my e-mail.. he did and it made a difference. Tonks_op From tinglinger at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 04:16:24 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:16:24 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128022 tinglinger there is nothing more annoying than having someone make their own silly interpretation of another's canon. Disagree, even tear apart, but don't put words in someone else's mouth for example- hambtty at t There are two - THE ONE BORN as the seventh month dies and THE ONE WILL BE BORN when the seventh month dies. greatelderone That means absolutely nothing. It's just common repetition that we see in all of Trelawney's prophecies. By your reasoning perhaps there was another servant that set out that day in PoA to rejoin Voldemort. tinglinger again - well how about THIS interpretation, geo? the POA prophecy was said twice because the event it predicted was true and happened twice - meaning that it could not be changed by the time turner.... otherwise it MIGHT have been possible that the prophecy ORIGINALLY was true the first time it occurred but was altered by H&H going back in time. Whether you agree with the repetition or not is is still more feasible than your response....... As far as the second repetition, you have not discredited the possibility that Neville will have a major role in defeating Voldemort. greatelderone And interesting enough, you seem rather intent in ignoring the overwhelming amount of evidence that shows Harry not Neville is the One. Is it so important that he has to be a prophecy child in order to play a part in the story when he already has enough reasons to be against Voldemort? tinglinger kindly respond to this post with your "overwhelming" canon evidence that BOTH Harry and Neville can't be the ONE. I am very curious indeed. and as for your question and without providing evidence to the contrary, why is it so important to you that Neville NOT be the prophecy child? tinglinger whose yahoogroup potterplots presents these types of theories with canon support - predictions may not happen but they cannot be dismissed http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 04:27:21 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:27:21 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128023 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > The Prophecy ends with "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark > Lord WILL BE BORN as the Seventh month dies (this is Harry). > > JKR stated in an interview that, "She and Trelawney worded the > Prophecy very carefully". There are two - THE ONE BORN as the > seventh month dies and THE ONE WILL BE BORN when the seventh month > dies. Tonks: Now wouldn't it be a kicker if it were neither one of them. Yes, I know the series is about HP and he has the mark and LV is after him all the time. But what if... there is another child somewhere... also born at that time to parents that said no to the dark lord 3x. What if... that child was the HBP? What if it takes 3 of them all born on July 31st. What if... Well, we have to talk about something till July. Might as well start some far, off the wall idea. Earlier today I also had a thought that the HBP was PP. I am just a bit nutty tonight. Are we going to have a lottery or game or something to guess who it is?? ;-) By the way I was looking at a chocolate frog cards tonight and the one for Voldemort has a full moon on it.. what is that all about?? Tonks_op From oppen at mycns.net Mon Apr 25 04:46:46 2005 From: oppen at mycns.net (ravenclaw001) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:46:46 -0000 Subject: Pettigrew and the DEs Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128024 Although what we've seen of Peter Pettigrew isn't very likeable, I do have to wonder just how he came to join the DEs. He doesn't look to me like the sort of person who'd have the stones to go look them up and say "Hi! I want to join up!" If for no other reason, he'd probably know perfectly well that most DEs would probably blast him into his component atoms on sight---and AFAIK there aren't and never were such things as DE recruiting booths. I rather lean toward the theory that Pettigrew was captured and broken, possibly by the Big V his own bad self. We, on here, tend to sneer at this, but I wonder just how ballsy any of us would be, away from our nice safe Muggle-world computer rooms, in some windowless basement with Lord Thingy showing us how many ways there are to hurt someone. *Suppressing a scene in my mind, of Lord V meeting his match in Sam Kinison: "Your _Cruciatus_ doesn't scare ME---I was married for FIVE FREAKIN' YEARS!"* As for how he was captured---wouldn't it be a hoot if his _mother_ was a DE, and set him up? I mean, that level of betrayal alone would break a lot of people, and it would make the deal where his mum received his posthumous Order of Merlin and his finger more ironic. It would also be a change from the cliche where the Evil Mastermind sics a beautiful _femme fatale_ on the poor schmo who he's ID'd as the Weak Link In The Chain. "Mommm! I knew you were mad about the wire hangers, but _this is a little bit too much!_" I wonder how Harry would feel if he found out that Pettigrew had been betrayed to torture and mind-rape by his own mum? From greatelderone at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 04:52:22 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:52:22 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128025 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tinglinger" wrote: > tinglinger again - > well how about THIS interpretation, geo? > the POA prophecy was said twice because the event > it predicted was true and happened twice GEO: It happened twice from the pov of Harry and Hermione, but from the pov of everyone else who weren't time travelling it only occured once. > - meaning > that it could not be changed by the time turner.... > otherwise it MIGHT have been possible that the > prophecy ORIGINALLY was true the first time it > occurred but was altered by H&H going back in time. GEO: Go back and read POA. Nothing was changed in the time turning, all they did was complete the circle by saving themselves and Sirius and Buckbeak. > As far as the second repetition, you have not > discredited the possibility that Neville will have > a major role in defeating Voldemort. GEO: Possibly because I agree that he would most likely play a major role in Harry's war on Voldemort though I might be biased on the subject since I rather like Neville. > I am very curious indeed. > and as for your question and without providing > evidence to the contrary, GEO: Evidence was provided in my original response through the OP didn't seem inclined to respond to the said evidence. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/127984 > why is it so important to > you that Neville NOT be the prophecy child? GEO: I find it most unlikely at this phase of story (about as likely as Draco repenting for his sins and joining Dumbledore) and would break one of the rules that JKR has apparently imposed on the story (Dumbledore being always right in his moments of exposition ) not to mention that the evidence supporting this theory doesn't exist except for a quote from Rowling saying that she worded the prophecy carefully, but then most fictional prophecies have been shown to have some alternative explainations or meanings. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 04:54:34 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 04:54:34 -0000 Subject: Peter Pettigrew (was Re: Nel Question # 6. ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128026 I am beginning to get suspicious about Peter. Why do we never see him with the others? In the pensive scene, he isn't there. Do we ever *see* him in any of the situations in which we see the other 3? Maybe I am just not remembering any; can anyone help me out on this, point me to places where it tells about all of them together? If he were that close to the other 3 such that they made him part of their gang and everything, why don't we ever see him with the others? Why would James, John and Sirius even have Peter as part of the group? Some say that he was just a hanger on, but I don't know. James doesn't seem the type to take on someone like that. Peter seems kind of snivelly like Snape and James would have hated that. Something just doesn't fit together here. Lupin being a werewolf is a different thing, Lupin was not a whimpy sort of person like Peter. I can't put my finger on it, but there is something just not right about the 4 of them together. Where was the rat during the Prank? It has been so long since I read the books I can't remember, was he there?? And we are never told how he got to the Weasley's. Something is just not adding up. Tonks_op From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 05:39:40 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 05:39:40 -0000 Subject: Peter Pettigrew (was Re: Nel Question # 6. ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128027 "Tonks": > > I am beginning to get suspicious about Peter. Why do we never see > him with the others? In the pensive scene, he isn't there. Finwitch: Oh yes, he was there. He complained about question ten (ways to identify a werewolf) being difficult and James asked how thick he could be, hanging out with one every full moon... When James is fighting with Severus Snape, Peter was Cheering him; Remus the Prefect was (pretending to?) reading a book; Sirius more or less made sure SS didn't get to take advantage when James' attention was on Lily... ---- Tonks: > I can't put my finger on it, but there is something just not > right about the 4 of them together. Where was the rat during the > Prank? Now that's the question I've been asking... Was it even something having to do with Sirius doing one on Snape at all? Sure, Remus seems to imply it was, (thought it'd be amusing etc...) and Sirius isn't denying it - but he didn't deny it when Harry directly accused him of murdering James & Lily either (even when he *wasn't* really guilty). Yes, it appears that Snape heard from Sirius how to pacify the Whomping Willow, but-- was it overheard conversation (with PP, Lupin being in the shack and James in who knows where) or some 'you're so stupid you don't know...' - taunt.. (I just don't see Sirius doing that sort-- it's not his style to brag and taunt like that. And even James was more for hexing, not taunts...) Tonks: > And we are never told how he got to the Weasley's. > Something is just not adding up. Finwitch: Yes, well... Remember it was Percy bringing the rat in... Possibly just after getting his Hogwarts letter, asking if he could take it for a pet... why would Molly say no? It's not like a pet of that sort costs anything, and the poor dear had lost a finger... Finwitch From naama_gat at hotmail.com Mon Apr 25 05:39:26 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 05:39:26 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128028 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > But what about- > > "Either MUST die at the hands of the other..." > > So if either Harry or Voldemort MUST die at the hand of the other, a > reasonable interpretation is that Harry and Voldemort can die by the > hand of NO other; meaning that only they have to power to kill each > other which in turn means that no one else can kill them. Is that > right? Well, we'll have to wait 3 years and see, but I think it is a > fair interpretaion. Well, "either" can be interpreted as one of two, so there's no need to conclude further than - either Voldemort OR Harry must die at the hands of the other. I.e., it is Voldmort who must die at Harry's hands OR it is Harry who must die at Voldemort's hands. In fact, for your interpretation to be correct, it means that Voldemort must kill Harry, and Harry must kill Voldemort - so that necessarily at the final battle both will die (if Harry survives and Voldemort dies - Harry will necessarily die in some other way - old age, disease, etc. - NOT at Voldemort's hands). Naama > > I might be of a different opinion, if it has said 'one will die at the > hand of the other', but it seems to says 'either Harry or Voldemort > *MUST* die by the hand of the other'. Of course some have interpreted > that phrase as 'either Harry or Neville must die at the hands of > Voldemort' but that's a different discussion altogether, although it > does very much re-enforce my position that the Prophecy greatly open > to interpretation. > > > > > > SSSusan: > > Now *this* much I'd be willing to go along with. ... But it > > wouldn't be because of a belief that *only* Voldy could kill him; it > > would be out of a fear that NO ONE will be able to kill him -- at > > least by an AK. Now, an *AK-47* might be another matter. ;-) > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > > bboyminn concludes: > > AK-47, I like that, that's funny. > > As far as ONLY Voldy being able to kill Harry, I have implied that, > but the great mystery is that we know Harry is protected from being > killed by Voldemort AND Voldemort is protected against being killed by > Harry, yet we also know that one MUST kill the other, which again > makes the greatest question of all - HOW? > > Steve/bboyminn From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 06:10:31 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:10:31 -0000 Subject: How does the WW fit into the MW? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128029 "Sandra Collins" > Here goes: > > After re-reading book two the other night (well, flicked through it) > I'm having trouble figuring out what parts of the WW are > accessible (either visually or physically) to muggles, and what > parts only exist through hidden doorways. For example, even > though the Hogwarts Express leaves from a magical hidden > platform in some kind of parallel world, Harry and Ron could > chase it in their car. They didn't go through any magic gateway... > or if they did, I must have missed it, and Ron must be far more > magical and 'switched on' than I thought. Besides, the car could > be seen in the muggle world, and must have brought the > Weasley clan from somewhere, but if that 'somewhere' was a > hidden WW place, what was the point of interacting with the > muggle world? Finwitch: I think the *train* could be seen -- Partially following muggle rail, I suppose... (of course, fractional platforms cannot be seen or anything in them, either). But Muggles don't make the connection -- probably thought it was some sort of special historical day or something if they paid attention to steam train... (unless it has a special charm making Muggles see what they expect to see -- an ordinary passenger train - Ron&Harry could see Hogwarts Express because that's what they expected...) As for Hogwarts, Hermione explains it (ruins with a sign DANGER DO NOT ENTER) - and other all-wizard places also have a pose as something else-- like St Mungos Hospital (and that sort). The Ministry has the classical Phone-box entrance... Mostly, it's underground, and Diagon Alley seems to be *inside a wall, behind a pub*... Don't forget that magic *can and does* make their trunks, houses, cars, tents and what not bigger from the inside. And the Weasley Burrow IS connected to Muggle World (At least a Taxi can find them), but hidden behind trees and in a not-very-populated area. Finwitch From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Apr 25 06:43:24 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:43:24 -0000 Subject: Papal Attack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128030 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > > > > Tonks: > I looked at the story. I do not see his source. I tried to e-mail him, > but the page did not load so I could not ask him. I find it highly > unlikly that the new Pope would, as one of his first orders of duty, > make a statement about Harry Potter. So that article can not be > correct. I want to know the source and date of this information and the > whole context. This was one sentance taken out of context. I just don't > believe it. Show me real proof from a valid source. If it is true I > will write to the Pope myself. The pope has e-mail you know. Course he > probably doesn't read it, but the last time I wrote to a VIP who I > thought would never read my e-mail.. he did and it made a difference. I agree that it seems unlikely that the Pope would bother with Harry Potter as one of his first acts/pronouncements. Let's face it, in a world beset by hunger, prejudice, war, disease, and hatred, Harry Potter just ain't all that important. Having said that, I would not be at all surprised if Benedict XVI has some rather firm opinions on the subject of Harry Potter. He is the kind of man who has wide ranging interests and very firm opinions about a lot of things. I agree that emailing him is likely a good idea, if only to register one's opinion. However, I seriously doubt it will change his mind should his opinion of Harry Potter be negative (which I suspect it probably is, at least in part). Just as Rowling is an author who writes the story she feels is appropriate regardless of what her readers think, Benedict XVI is a theologian who expresses the moral opinions he feels to be correct without regard for what his listeners think. He wouldn't be much of a Pope if he did otherwise. Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Mon Apr 25 06:48:47 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:48:47 -0000 Subject: What are your hopes and fears for Severus Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128031 Following up on the recent discussions about HBP and likes/dislikes in general, here is a hot topic: What are your hopes for the character of Severus Snape? Where would you like to see his character going. On the other hand, what are your fears about where you think his character WILL go? I'll start. My hope would be to see: 1) some effective karmic payback for his attitude, particularly toward Harry and Neville; 2) some answers as to his past and motivations; 3) some genuine growth and change in his character, to the point he is able to admit he has been wrong; Where I fear he IS going is: 1) his inability to control his feelings with regard to Harry will lead to disaster, 2) I think he will end up being on the good side in the end, but the cost of his "redemption" will be his death; 3) I doubt we will ever see any real growth in his character; Thoughts? Additions? Screams? Rotten Tomatoes (my dog loves 'em)? Lupinlore From ladilyndi at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 06:51:05 2005 From: ladilyndi at yahoo.com (Ladi lyndi) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 23:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050425065105.30620.qmail@web53907.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128032 "B.G." wrote: > > B.G.: > > The Prophecy begins with "The one with the power to vanquish > > the Dark Lord approaches.....BORN to those.......as the seventh > > month dies (this is Neville). > > GEO: I don't understand why this would refer to both Harry and > Neville rather than just one of the boys. The Prophecy ends with "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord WILL BE BORN as the Seventh month dies (this is Harry). JKR stated in an interview that, "She and Trelawney worded the Prophecy very carefully". There are two - THE ONE BORN as the seventh month dies and THE ONE WILL BE BORN when the seventh month dies. "B.G." Lynn: I fail to understand why you think this particular passage is the carefully worded one and why you believe it refers to 2 people. You focus on the Born and Will be Born while ignoring the word APPROACHES - meaning it hasn't happened yet but will soon. Adding this specific word gives future tense to the first Born rather than past tense. Also, the timing of the prophesy would have had to be very precise as Neville was born on July 30 (JKR) and Harry on July 31. So, the meeting with Trelawney would have had to take place the night of July 30th in order for your interpretation of the prophesy to be true - but then the word APPROACHES in reference to the first BORN wouldn't have been there. Rather, it would need to have read IS HERE rather than APPROACHES. Lynn test'; "> __________________________________________________ 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 gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 25 06:57:52 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 06:57:52 -0000 Subject: Another dumb question--Halloween? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128034 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis" wrote: Phyllis: > It's canon - see Ch. 4 of PS/SS, where Hagrid tells Harry "All anyone > knows is, he turned up in the village where you was all living, on > *Halloween* ten years ago" (my emphasis). > > The Lexicon makes it clear that there are many discrepancies with the > dates in the series - with regard to the reference to Bonfire Night, > specifically, it says: > > "'Perhaps people have been celebrating Bonfire Night early -- it's not > until next week, folks!...' > > Actually, it can't be. If November 1 is on a Tuesday, November 5 will > be the Saturday of that same week. Jim is a bit addled from all the > owls and shooting starts, perhaps." Geoff: I wonder whether Jo Rowling researched her dates thoroughly when she first started to write Philosopher's Stone. Did she realise that the book and its successors would become so popular and widely read - and, as a result, placed under the microscopes of so many people investigating the minutiae of her creation? Philosopher's Stone was first published in 1997 which suggests that she may have been writing it for some time before. I wonder whether she may have initially taken the dates from the year in which she started to plan the book - in which case, 1st November fell on a Tuesday in 1994. Admittedly, this still leaves the discrepancy of the weather forecaster referring to "next week". The marrying up of dates is often a problem, especially if a writer is trying to do this when checking back on a book. For example, JRR Tolkien is known to have spent a great deal of time trying to match up dates and phhases of the moon and other linked data in LOTR. I have a favourite book about a schoolteacher - "To Serve Them All My Days" - in which the author's timeline is a complete mess. Perhaps we need just to stick with the information fixing the year of the attack as 1981 and leave it like that. I can run with the date discrepancies; I don't feel that they cause too many problems. After all, recalling on which day of the week an event occurred is not always easy. For example, I have to think to recall on which weekday the 11th September attacks on New York occurred but I can name the day of the week of the John Kennedy assassination without batting an eyelid - it all depends on what I was doing at that precise moment. From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 25 09:58:51 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 09:58:51 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128035 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tinglinger" wrote: tinglinger: > kindly respond to this post with your "overwhelming" > canon evidence that BOTH Harry and Neville can't be > the ONE. I am very curious indeed. > and as for your question and without providing > evidence to the contrary, why is it so important to > you that Neville NOT be the prophecy child? Geoff: Although I am of the opinion that Harry /is/ the one, there was enough of a measure of ambivalence in Dumbledore's comments to raise the thought. '"The odd thing, Harry" he (Dumbledore) said softly, "is that it may not have meant you at all. Sybill's prophecy could have applied to two wizard boys, both born at the end of July that year, both of whom had parents in the Order of the Phoenix, both sets of parents having narrowly escapd Voldemort three times. One, of course, was you. the other was Nevile Longbottom." "But then... but then, why was it my name on the prophecy and not Neville's?" "The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack on you as a child," said Dumbledore. "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." "Then - it might not be me?" said Harry. "I am afraid," said Dumbeldore slowly,looking as though every word cost him a great effort, "that there is no doubt that it is you." "But you said - Neville was born at the end of July too -and his mum and dad -" "You are forgetting the next part pf the prophecy, the final identifying feature of the boy who could vanquish Voldemort... Voldemort himself would mark him as his equal. And so he did, Harry. He chose you, not Neville. He gave you that scar that has proved both blessing and curse." "But he might have chosen wrong!" said Harry. "He might have marked the wrong person." "He chose the boy he thought /most likely/ to be a danger to him," said Dumbledore' (OOTP "The Lost Prophecy" p.742 UK edition) Bearing in mind that Voldemort had not heard the prophecy completely (ibid. p.743) it just does cast the shadow of a thought that Voldemort did attack and mark the wrong infant which would make for fun and games in the future.... From naama_gat at hotmail.com Mon Apr 25 10:47:53 2005 From: naama_gat at hotmail.com (naamagatus) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 10:47:53 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128036 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > > > > The Prophecy begins with "The one with the power to vanquish the > Dark Lord approaches.....BORN to those.......as the seventh month > dies (this is Neville). The Prophecy ends with "The one with the > power to vanquish the Dark Lord WILL BE BORN as the Seventh month > dies (this is Harry). IMHO Neville and Harry are in this together - > they will join forces to defeat the Dark Lord. But mid-Prophecy it > gets disturbing, "And either must die at the hand of the other for > neither can live while the other survives...." The other is LV and > either/neither refer to Neville and Harry. But that doesn't make sense grammatically (syntactically?). If the first line refers to one person and the last line refers to another - then the middle part can't refer to both of them: The "either", "other" and "neither" can't refer to the second one - since he hasn't been presented yet. On grammatical grounds alone, the two people to which the middle part refer must be "the one with the power" and "the Dark lord". Naama From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 11:23:50 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 11:23:50 -0000 Subject: Aberforth / Albus' jokes--gifts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128037 "Catlady: > > > > I don't understand why so many listies don't share my certainty that > > Albus knows perfectly well that Aberforth can read perfectly well, and > > was just making a joke. > > > > Hickengruendler: > > Because almost every time Dumbledore seemingly makes a joke, it turns > out to be the truth. This started back during the Sorting in Harry's > first year, when he said that every student who goes into the Third > Floor is in danger of dieing a gruesome death. I grinned after this > statement and so did Harry, but the students who knew him better did > not and rightfully so. Dumbledore was absolutely serious. > > And then during the Yule Ball he said that even he didn't know all the > secrets of Hogwarts and told Karkaroff (?) about the Chamber-Pot room, > and again I thought he was making a joke. Comes OotP and we see again > that he was serious. > > I can't remember a Dumbledore statement that didn't turn out to be the > truth, (well, maybe that he saw a pair of socks in the Mirror of > Erised, but even this could be the truth). > > Therefore I'm inclined to take most of Dumbledore's "funny" statements > as the truth until proven otherwise. Finwitch: Quite right - remember his announcement in GoF, causing lots of tension, relieved by Fred who said right out and loudly: "you're joking". Dumbledore counters with: "No, I'm not joking, Mr Weasley. Now that you mentioned it, though, I did hear an excellent one about a troll, a leprechaun and a hag who all go into a bar..." So no - I'd say Dumbledore is often quite literal, though - like with his famous few words: 'Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak! -- Thank you!" Maybe those were names of some new/old Hogwarts elves... About that mirror -- yes, I do believe old Albus was being honest. "I see myself holding a pair of thick socks. Another Christmas gone and I didn't get a single pair. Everyone insists on giving me books". Now, when we add this comment about his brother, Aberforth "not certain whether he can read" - If Aberforth can't read (or Albus doesn't know he can), would he be giving Albus *books* for Christmas? Sure, he *could* just ask the shopkeeper, but... Maybe Aberforth used to give him socks (thread spinned from goat-hair, I suppose) and was so at odds with his brother that he didn't give him *anything*. Albus would desire to see that traditional pair of socks, showing his brother was ready to make up... (as to why Aberforth would be upset... well, for Albus spending Christmas at Hogwarts-- or something like Aberforth believing Sirius was innocent or at least should have a fair trial (remember Aberforth had been persecuted for those *improper charms* -- who ever said he was guilty of anything?) ... You know - what ever. Does Aberforth, the possible illiterate - also give his brother books (I don't see why he'd do that! Such a silly idea... or maybe he can't read, but keeps sending his brother books anyway via the shopkeeper...) - or he used to give dear brother Albus socks but hadn't given him anything due to some dislike for a while... Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 11:38:37 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 11:38:37 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: <20050425065105.30620.qmail@web53907.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128038 Finwitch: One thing, though. It says Either must die AT the hand of the other - not By the hand... which means that, the two this line refers to, must be close together in order to die - AT the hand of the other... - you know, like Harry tied into that gravestone... We won't know for certain until the 7th book, though. Finwitch From meriaugust at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 12:42:06 2005 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 12:42:06 -0000 Subject: How does the WW fit into the MW? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128039 --- "Sandra Collins" wrote: snip But if that's the case, would these places be visible and > accessible to muggle students who go to Hogwarts? (snip) > > So to go a step further, would a muggle Hogwartonian like > Hermione or Harry easily find the parts of the UK where > purebloods (or any) witches and wizards live? Meri here: Not to be nitpicky (I guess I just can't help myself ;-), but neither Harry nor Hermione are Muggles. Hermione is a muggleborn but is a full powered witch, and Harry is a pureblooded wizard with a witch mother and a wizard father (or at the very least he's a halfblood, depending on your definition). They are both members of the magical world and, as such, must be exempt from being affected by the spells and protections that the WW uses to keep their cherished places safe. After all, they both go to Diagon Alley, the Burrow and the Quiditch World Cup without any trouble. Otherwise everytime they got to Hogwarts they would see nothing but an old ruin. I would also assume that this exemption extends to others "in the know" about the WW, especially the parents of muggleborns, like Mr. and Mrs. Granger, who we know have been to Diagon Alley. But make no mistake, Harry and Hermione are wizard and witch, and so therefore can not be prevented from acessing stuff that is protected from muggles. Meri - 81 days and counting till HBP... From jaanise at hello.lv Mon Apr 25 12:44:51 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 15:44:51 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Website FAQ Poll In-Reply-To: <20050422175805.96949.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000001c54994$96aaf1a0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128040 -----Original Message----- From: theotokos Then again, if she never intended to answer it on the website why would she present it as an option? --------------------------- Jaanis: Because of Rowling's readiness to openly answer any of the poll question, I've always thought that those questions are apparent evidence for things that are not too important for the plot. So, in this case, I think that Rowling by this poll has clearly stated that Neville won't have such big importance in the story as many of us are theorizing. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Mon Apr 25 13:27:56 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:27:56 -0000 Subject: Website FAQ Poll In-Reply-To: <000001c54994$96aaf1a0$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128041 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "JaanisE" wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > From: theotokos > > Then again, if she never intended to answer it on the website why would > she present it as an option? > > --------------------------- > > Jaanis: > > Because of Rowling's readiness to openly answer any of the poll > question, I've always thought that those questions are apparent > evidence for things that are not too important for the plot. So, in > this case, Ithink that Rowling by this poll has clearly stated that > Neville won't have such big importance in the story as many of us > are theorizing. Valky: I disagree, although it might happen that the FAQ poll would only be inclusive of 'unimportant' questions I kind of, well actually, I do believe that JKR would consider it cowardly and cheap not to put at least one question up that she really doesn't want to answer. I know I profess to know a lot about a person I have never met but JK really comes across as a person who would prefer a real challenge over the soft option anyday. I do think that she hasn't taken the soft option and that at least one of the FAQ each time is worth its weight in galleons... maybe its not the Neville question, maybe it is, but either way I think the main reason it goes unanswered is because this cannot be a priority in her life now, she has huge things going on now and that's fine by me. I know how to wait... From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 25 13:58:22 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 13:58:22 -0000 Subject: Prophecy Wording And Killing Harry For Fun Combined - Was "Prophecy Wording" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128042 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AyanEva" wrote: AyanEva: > But definitions aside, I think a really easy example of one of Harry's > literary predecesors is Frodo from LOTR. And look how Frodo ended up; > he was so screwed up after suffering such an impossible burden that he > eventually had to just up and leave our world altogether. > > A "happy ending" just doesn't make any sense to me, especially if > Harry is a tragic hero. After everything that Harry's been through, > and will go through, I just don't see how it's possible. Unless Harry > gets a really strong 'Obliviate,' after all is said and done, I think > it actually seems kind of cruel for him to live and be forced to pick > up the pieces. We've got emotional, psychological, and physical > torment. And he still has two more books in which to suffer. True, > since I'm comparing him to Frodo, one could argue that Frodo didn't > die either, and so can't be called a classical tragic hero, thereby > implying that Harry doesn't necessarily have to die. However, Frodo > did basically "die" in the sense that he left the world entirely; > perhaps it could be called a literal journey to the light at the end > of the tunnel and a place that always sounded kind of like the > traditional concept of heaven. Therefore, his near disaster with the > ring in the end would be a fatal flaw. Geoff: I must first declare an interest in that I am a fully paid-up member of the "I want Harry to survive" group. Passing on, my eye caught your comments about Frodo. Those members who wade through my random thoughts and jottings will know that I am a long time reader and fan of LOTR - either this year or 2006 is the 50th anniversary of my first "finding" the book. Yikes! Strangely, I have never equated Frodo's journey to Valinor with death. The elves are immortal and have the gift of being able to sail to the Undying Lands when they become weary of Middle-Earth and that gift was passed to Frodo by Arwen. I don't think that Frodo came back "screwed up"; he came back weary but seemed to spend quite a lot of time with friends and quietly enjoying Shire life. It was the wearisome reminders of the hurts he had suffered at Amon Sul and again with Shelob at Cirith Ungol that made him physically decide to go to a place of complete healing and peace. He was also to spend nearly two years in the Shire after their return before he took this decision. I think a sadder ending would have been if Frodo had fallen into the Sammath Naur with Gollum and not been able to see something of the fruits of victory. I would like this to be true of Harry. The interesting parallel which occurs to me could be that it was Frodo's "right hand man", Sam, who came more into prominence once the ring was gone. I wonder what the future might hold for the youngest male Weasley? From jaanise at hello.lv Mon Apr 25 18:26:48 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:26:48 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Website FAQ Poll In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000201c549c4$58833a60$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128043 -----Original Message----- From: Valky I disagree, although it might happen that the FAQ poll would only be inclusive of 'unimportant' questions I kind of, well actually, I do believe that JKR would consider it cowardly and cheap not to put at least one question up that she really doesn't want to answer. I know I profess to know a lot about a person I have never met but JK really comes across as a person who would prefer a real challenge over the soft option anyday. --------------------------- Jaanis: I don't think the poll questions are totally *unimportant*, I just said I think they're not *too* important. Not too important for the story in the last two books anyway. I don't see it as a matter of challange or bravery, but there must be some responsibility towards the readers, those who don't want the mystery relieved sooner than necessary, and to those who maybe *think* they want it - for their own sake. And I suppose, there are some responsibility towards the publishers, although I don't know what agreement they have there. At least, that's the way how the author has started it and has been acting till now and we're already expecting the mysteriousness. The poll questions, I see, as an opportunity either to find out something more about HP world that is not and is not going to be in any book of HP series (like a more interactive part of her site's extra and faq sections), or maybe some bits about the two future books, but again - if that's the case, the question shouldn't include anything *big*. Or at least the answer as Rowling gives it. So, I think that the question about Neville more or less indicates that he won't be that *very*important* Neville in many of fans' theories or fanfics. From mokeshwyn at yahoo.com Sun Apr 24 19:34:22 2005 From: mokeshwyn at yahoo.com (mokeshwyn) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:34:22 -0000 Subject: DADA Teacher In-Reply-To: <4269FF73.7070504@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128044 Kathy: > During one interview, JKR refused to answer a person asking > if a DADA teacher would last two years. > > Any other possibilities??? Dumbledore? "mokeshwyn" From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Apr 25 18:50:14 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:50:14 -0000 Subject: Website FAQ Poll In-Reply-To: <000201c549c4$58833a60$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128045 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "JaanisE" wrote: > > Jaanis: > > I don't think the poll questions are totally *unimportant*, I just said > I think they're not *too* important. Not too important for the story in > the last two books anyway. > > I don't see it as a matter of challange or bravery, but there must be > some responsibility towards the readers, those who don't want the > mystery relieved sooner than necessary, and to those who maybe *think* > they want it - for their own sake. And I suppose, there are some > responsibility towards the publishers, although I don't know what > agreement they have there. At least, that's the way how the author has > started it and has been acting till now and we're already expecting the > mysteriousness. > > The poll questions, I see, as an opportunity either to find out > something more about HP world that is not and is not going to be in any > book of HP series (like a more interactive part of her site's extra and > faq sections), or maybe some bits about the two future books, but again > - if that's the case, the question shouldn't include anything *big*. Or > at least the answer as Rowling gives it. > > So, I think that the question about Neville more or less indicates that > he won't be that *very*important* Neville in many of fans' theories or > fanfics. Hickengruendler: I would agree with you, if it weren't for how she answered the Petunia FAQ-Question. She basically didn't answer it at all, but instead gave some new hints to make us even more curious about it. She could easily do the same about the Neville question as well. From kjones at telus.net Mon Apr 25 03:30:59 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 20:30:59 -0700 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <426C6473.7070005@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 128046 greatelderone wrote: > GEO: It's just common repetition that we see in all of > Trelawney's prophecies. > > IT WILL HAPPEN TONIGHT. 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 HE WAS. > > By your reasoning perhaps there was another servant that set out > that day in PoA to rejoin Voldemort. Kathy Writes: As far as that goes, Sirius was "chained for twelve years" and broke free, possibly to join his master (if he was the spy) as well as Peter who "set out to rejoin his master". JKR loves setting up pairs or more. When Voldemort said that his most trusted servant was at Hogwarts, there was Crouch/Moody, and Sirius, sitting in the pumpkin patch, and Snape. Could be any one of them. KJ From silvers_and_dragons at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 16:28:39 2005 From: silvers_and_dragons at yahoo.com (silver dragon) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 09:28:39 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherins - evil or ambitious? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050425162839.90529.qmail@web42110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128047 "B.G." wrote: > Slytherins are ambitious and some are overly so but evil? > They are "cunning and will use any means to achieve their > ends" (JKR). Others may use various means including > wealth, intelligence, strength, the list is endless. Loyalty > and friendship are not biggies in this House but I'm sure > they exist. Very nice observation. The Slytherin is ambitious, that is correct; they are not evil, they just don't care on how they will get what they want. Whether it's a good way or a bad way. All they care for is they get what they want. They will save their own skins first, then save the others if necessary. It's me first before you. silver dragon From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 25 19:07:33 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:07:33 -0000 Subject: Things I like/hate about HP - was Re: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128048 AyanEva wrote : > 8) Pre-OOTP rivalry between Harry and Draco. It was fun! Now Draco > just comes off as childish. SSSusan: Do you think so? I do think Draco's awfully two-dimensional, but that little encounter with Harry at the end of OoP gave me hope that he'll develop into a more serious rival. Somehow his use of the term "my dad" instead of his usual "my father" when threatening Harry seemed more truly menacing than usual. AyanEva: > 2) Post-OOTP Draco. He's become a bit one-dimensional and irrelevant > in this book.... > 3) Static Ron. Ron's character didn't evolve in Book 5, so now he's > a bit out of kilter with Harry, Hermione, and Neville. He's got the > same problem as Draco's character. SSSusan: I'm not sure I can agree with this. Well, Draco as 2-D I just said, above, but Ron's character having the same "one-dimensionality and irrelevance" as Draco's? I did see character development in Ron's trying out for & struggling with his role on the Quidditch team as well as in the storyline of his becoming Prefect. AyanEva: > 7) James Potter. I don't hate him, but I'm very disappointed in > MWPP-era James. Harry is certainly not like his father was > in school. *chides Severus for continually believing that Harry is* SSSusan: I'm pleased to see that last little bit in there about Snape. ;-) AyanEva: > 8) Nymphadora Tonks. I don't hate her so much as distrust her. I > can't quite put my finger on it, and maybe it'll turn out to be > nothing, but I wouldn't let her near any sensitive information. > > And now for Luna. I think part of it is that I see her as an > outside threat to the Trio. I don't want anyone to be added to the > Trio. Neville's OK, because he was there from the get-go. I > don't like the threat that Luna poses to Hermione in replacing her > as Harry's counsel (see end of Book 5). I found myself irrational > in my intent to side with Hermione in every confrontation between > her and Luna. Which is funny, because I think that's the point that > JKR is trying to address. The dismissal of things that don't appear > logical isn't always beneficial. It's a good point to make, but I > still hate Luna, the irritating prat. SSSusan: I did not care, much at all, for either of these two new female characters in OoP (not to mention a 3rd new female character, Umbridge!). I don't *dis*like Tonks, actually, but her character just kind of bugged me. I see some potential for her, though, if JKR will flesh her out more. Luna, OTOH? I'm afraid I'm totally with you, AyanEva. Irrational as it may be (as you say), my response to her was a lot like yours. She bugged me so much, I tended to side with Hermione even when Hermione *should* have opened up a little to the possibility of things outside books & logic & proof. Siriusly Snapey Susan, who dislikes any shipping involving Luna because she just doesn't like Luna. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 19:08:52 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:08:52 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: <426C6473.7070005@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128049 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Jones wrote: > Kathy Writes: > > As far as that goes, Sirius was "chained for twelve years" and > broke free, possibly to join his master (if he was the spy) as > well as Peter who "set out to rejoin his master". GEO: Except we all know that Sirius wasn't the servant of the Dark Lord and he had already broken free from Azkaban the previous year so he really isn't the servant mentioned in the prophecy. JKR loves > setting up pairs or more. When Voldemort said that his most > trusted servant was at Hogwarts, there was Crouch/Moody, and > Sirius, sitting in the pumpkin patch, and Snape. Could be any > one of them. GEO: And Crouch was still imprisoned in his father's house during that time so it can't be him since he didn't break free until the Quidditch Cup Game later in the summer and Snape of course was one of the missing Death Eaters who either had left Voldemort forever or was too cowardly not to mention the fact that Snape didn't set out and return to Voldemort that night. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 19:26:28 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:26:28 -0000 Subject: Nel Question # 6. Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128050 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > > Alla's follow ? up questions. > I believe that we know very little about motivations behind Peter > Pettigrew's actions, therefore the majority of the questions, > while based on canon, are quite speculative, due to limited > information. > Here we go. > > 1. `Although every society, large or miniscule, can change the > meaning of betrayal, it is political circumstances that bear down > most heavily upon our reliability. Of all extenuating circumstances, > the pressure of military force is the most irresistible. Fear of > persecution makes all of us potentially treacherous. Who is to > condemn the Soviet citizen who shuts his door and heart to a > dissident who once was his friend? It is the self-righteous, far > more than the craven, who are unjust. Public fear, even more than > personal circumstances, makes us treacherous; and it also excuses > us, because danger summons us to look out for ourselves and our > families. Heroism is very rare, and no one is obliged to rise to > such heights. When someone does, he is being praised precisely for > being more than merely good" ? "Ordinary Vices" by > Judith Shklar. a_svirn: There is a bit of a difference between "shutting one's heart and one's door" to one's dissident friend (although this is not a nice thing to do, admittedly) and actually reporting one's friend to KGB. And still more difference between reporting someone-who-was-once-a- friend-but-chose-the-wrong-side and betraying your fellow conspirator. Not everyone in the USSR challenged communists openly and why should they? But then, decent people didn't sell their friends either. > > Do you think that this quote is in any way, shape or form applicable > to Peter Pettigrew's circumstances? In your opinion, did he owe > to his friends to be "more than merely good" or not? a_svirn: No, I don't. He was much less then good whichever way you look at it. > Sirius in the Shack tells Peter that he should have died just as > they would have died for him. Would they? a_svirn: Yes, I think they would. In fact, Sirius did. > 2. In her well known quote JKR talks about Peter as someone who out > of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the strongest person. > " Q. : You referred to the darkness in your books, and there's > been a lot of talk and even concern over that. > > JKR: You have a choice when you're going to introduce a very evil > character. You can dress a guy up with loads of ammunition, put a > black Stetson on him, and say, "Bad guy. Shoot him." I'm > writing about shades of evil. You have Voldemort, a raging > psychopath, devoid of the normal human responses to other people's > suffering, and there ARE people like that in the world. But then you > have Wormtail, who out of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the > strongest person. What's very important for me is when Dumbledore > says that you have to choose between what is right and what is easy. > This is the setup for the next three books. All of them are going to > have to choose, because what is easy is often not right." > (Entertainment Weekly, September 7, 2000) > > Is that really all that there is to Peter? Is that the only reason > he befriended James, Sirius and Remus? Is that why he joined > Voldemort? a_svirn: Well, JKR would know, wouldn't she? She is the one who created him after all. As for reasons to befriend James and Sirius: aside from that already mentioned, they were fun to be with and were prepared to tolerate him. If it wasn't for the little matter of saving his neck Peter would much prefer their company to that of Voldemort. > > 3. What is your stand on "Peter as Dumbledore's spy" > theory and all the variables from it? a_svirn: Not likely. > 5. So, why did Peter end up with Weasleys of all people? a_svirn: They are close enough to power to be well-informed and they were willing to tolerate him. > > 6. Sirius in the Shack accuses Peter of passing information to > Voldemort for a year. How did Sirius know for how long it happened? > Is it because Dumbledore started getting suspicious a year before > Potters death? Any other reasons? a_svirn: He got it from DD. DD told James that someone close to him kept LV informed. James and Sirius suspected Remus, but after the Potters' murder it was borne upon Sirius that it must have been Peter after all. From ayaneva at aol.com Mon Apr 25 18:31:36 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 18:31:36 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry, Defeating Voldemort , Percy Weasley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128051 > Geoff wrote: > Strangely, I have never equated Frodo's journey to Valinor with > death. The elves are immortal and have the gift of being able to > sail to the Undying Lands when they become weary of Middle-Earth > and that gift was passed to Frodo by Arwen. AyanEva: See, I always assumed that only the elves could actually live forever and while Frodo (and later Sam) could stave off death for awhile, they'd eventually have to die since men are inherently mortal. I think what I meant to say when I stated that Frodo "died," is that by leaving for Arda he's passing from our world and is now "dead" to this world. I know I'm making this awfully abstract, but it's fun to think about none the less! It kind of goes along with the idea that there are several different ways to "die" or "live." So, just as some have mentioned that Harry might not actually kill Voldie in the sense that Voldie is "dead" dead. The same could be true of Harry in terms of his survival: He might be living but not alive, while Voldie really is quite dead. I only mention this because, again, I can't see how Harry can come out of this alive and OK. So, it makes more sense to me that if he's going to survive this, it's going to be in some way that's not the common definition of "live." I think I've just gone and confused myself...I hope I've made my point mostly clear; I'm not sure I can work that out a second time! Geoff: > I don't think that Frodo came back "screwed up"; he came back > weary but seemed to spend quite a lot of time with friends and > quietly enjoying Shire life. It was the wearisome reminders of > the hurts he had suffered at Amon Sul and again with Shelob at > Cirith Ungol that made him physically decide to go to a place of > complete healing and peace. He was also to spend nearly two years > in the Shire after their return before he took this decision. I > think a sadder ending would have been if Frodo had fallen into > the Sammath Naur with Gollum and not been able to see something > of the fruits of victory. I would like this to be true of Harry. AyanEva: I always got the sense that Frodo wasn't actually enjoying his time in the Shire afterwards, although I'll admit that for some inexplicable reason, I stopped about 60 pages from the end of "The Return of the King" a few years ago and have yet to actually finish the book. But, going by the information from the website, "The Encyclopedia of Arda" ( http://www.glyphweb.com/arda/ ), it doesn't seem like Frodo was having a very good time of it at all. And I know I shouldn't reference the movie since it's not an exact source, but I remember Frodo saying how you go back after a great trial and you want things to be the same, but they just aren't. In my mind, the burden of the memories of all of the events that took place pretty much constitute "screwed up." And Harry being just a teenager and all would deal with the whole "only you can defeat this bad guy, now hop to it" worse than Frodo, as an adult, dealt with it. I totally see Harry out of his mind or something in a mental institution. After all, he wasn't doing so hot emotionally when ol' Voldie possesed him in Book 5. What's he going to be like when things really get going? I'm pretty pessimistic by nature and I can only see him being a bit shattered by it all. Book 5 has me really worried about Harry's ability to get the job done in an efficient manner; he really bungled the Sirius thing and had me screaming "Go get Snape! Go tell Snape! *screams in frustration, rends clothing* WHY DIDN'T HE GET PROFESSOR SNAPE!!! Harry, you're a total dolt!" You just knew it was going to turn out badly. The neighbors probably wondered what in the world I was doing, what with all of the yelling. But I'm willing to give Harry some leniency for not thinking straight since he was so concerned for Sirius. As for the alternate ending with Harry not seeing the fruits of his labor, I actually find that ending to be the most satisfying because it would be more realistic than "and he married Ginny, had 7 kids, and lived happily ever after working as an Auror!" However, there's still the problem of Harry being "dead" dead in that scenario. And I'd be sobbing like a little kid and depressed for the next few months. Geoff: > The interesting parallel which occurs to me could be that it was > Frodo's "right hand man", Sam, who came more into prominence once > the ring was gone. I wonder what the future might hold for the > youngest male Weasley? AyanEva: Exactly! It was kind of Sam that saved the day. In my post of things that I liked/disliked about HP ( http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128008 ) I mentioned really liking Ron, in part, because he reminds me of the role that Sam played. You don't really expect much out of Sam or Ron, but then they rise to the occassion. AyanEva -------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Subhash Sane Subject: Two ways of Defeating Voldemort Subhash: > At the end of Order Of The Phoenix, we saw Sirius disappearing > behind the veil and he did not come back. This is one of the > way by which Voldemort can be killed. If Harry manages to send > Voldemort behind that veil, even Voldemort can't come back. Even > the protection given by the experiment in the past won't save > him from the death. Perhaps, Harry is the only person who can > come back from that veil. So, this is one of the ways of > defeating Voldemort. AyanEva: But if the veil is equated with death, I don't see how the veil could kill Voldemort. I still think that Voldie's not going to die in the traditional sense of the word, unless the "I have Harry's blood now" thing makes him just mortal enough to kill him, in which case the veil could kill him. Maybe the Harry's blood, being pure of heart or some other cliched quality, diluted Voldie's protections against death? Subhash in post 128003: > Though Percy was in Gryffindor, he was more Slytherinish. He > hated his father for not giving up THAT ATTITUDE. AyanEva: Great theory about Percy Weasley, I never thought of set-up route. My only general question just to throw out there is this: Why was Percy placed in Gryffindor in the first place? Did the Sorting Hat run into a similar situation as with Harry? Do we know what Percy was like as a child, as a first or second year student? Was there a defining moment or event that made him the jerk that he is today? Or did he just not deal as well as his brothers with the teasing. I do wonder if Percy's attitude is hiding the fact that he's a really sensative person. After all, if he gets to the top, there's no one that can really hurt him, right? AyanEva- who doesn't know why she feels compelled to post so much. It's HP withdrawal, I suppose. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 19:40:09 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:40:09 -0000 Subject: Slytherins - evil or ambitious? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128052 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "B.G." wrote: > > Malfoy uses Goyle and Crabbe to get what he > wants. Goyle and Crabbe get what they want by using Malfoy. a_svirn: And what would that be, I wonder? > Others may use various means including wealth, intellegence, > strength, the list is endless. Loyalty and friendship are not > biggies in this House but I'm sure they exist. > a_svirn: I am sure they do. Would be nice, if we got a proof to it though. From jaanise at hello.lv Mon Apr 25 19:59:10 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 22:59:10 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000101c549d1$403cb500$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128053 -----Original Message----- From: Naama But that doesn't make sense grammatically (syntactically?). If the first line refers to one person and the last line refers to another - then the middle part can't refer to both of them: The "either", "other" and "neither" can't refer to the second one - since he hasn't been presented yet. -------------------------- Jaanis: While I agree that most probably the one /born/ and the one /will be born/ is the same person and repeating is just a feature for confusing predictions, I think that "either"/"neither" and "other" may be three persons rather than only two: ~Quote from OotP, Ch37~ ... and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives... ~~~~~ If I stop here, then it should be quite dispassionate and logical. The "other" *may be* as well *may not be* one of those two. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Apr 25 20:12:48 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:12:48 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Reminder of List Closure Poll (HBP) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128054 Greetings from Hexquarters! This is a reminder that there is currently an advisory poll open on the topic of HPfGU list closure at the release of Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. This poll will close on Monday, May 2, 2005, so if you have not yet registered your preference and would like to do so, please vote soon. The poll was announced here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/126978 You will find additional information about the list closure and links to helpful time zone information in that ADMIN. The poll itself may be found at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/surveys?id=1748067 If you have any comments to make about this issue, please do not do so here on the main list; instead, join the discussion already underway at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback . You should read the instructions there on how to join if you are not already a member of Feedback. Please do not attempt to reply to this message to cast your vote, as poll votes are not collected via e-mail. You must go to the Yahoo! Groups site listed above to cast your vote. Thanks! Shorty Elf, for the HPfGU Admin Team From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 20:15:21 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:15:21 -0000 Subject: Another dumb question--Halloween? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128055 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis" wrote: > > Amiable Dorsai wrote: > > > The HP Lexicon has it that James and Lily Potter were killed on > > October 31. That's barely possible, given that the story in book > >one begins on Tuesday, and we find out that Guy Fawkes Day > >(November 5) is"next week"... > ...Actually, it can't be. If November 1 is on a Tuesday, November 5 > will be the Saturday of that same week. Jim is a bit addled from all > the owls and shooting starts, perhaps." I figure it can be if Tuesday is Halloween, and Voldy attacked just after midnight. Stretching things, a bit, I suppose. Thanks for the reference, I'd missed that detail of Harry's conversation with Hagrid. Amiable Dorsai From jmrazo at hotmail.com Mon Apr 25 20:26:17 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:26:17 -0000 Subject: Nel Question # 6. Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: Alla: > > I am afraid I agree with Potioncat. phoenixgod2000: Thats all right, we're still friends :) >Peter does not say - he( Voldemort) made me do it, etc,etc, etc.... > > He says instead: > > "He - he was taking over everywhere!" gasped Pettigrew. "Wh- what > was there to be gained by refusing him?" - PoA, p.374, paperback. he also says "what could I have done? The dark lord...you have no idea...he has weapons you can't imagine...I never meant it to happen..." I see what your saying but to me, this part reads true and it sounds like he was at the wrong end of the dark lords wand for a while. > Alla: > > Oh, I agree that Peter owed his loyalty to Potters and others as > fellow members of the resistance, no question in my mind. What I was > getting at, I guess, was more personal level of loyalty? In > particular, the dismissive attitude of James and Sirius in the > pensieve scene. That just sounded like friends guy mocking to me. My friends and I still do it to each other all the time. You should hear some of the things we call each other. anyone who didn't know us would think that we hated each other, but I've known each one of them for about fifteen years. I saw that scene much more innocently than a lot of other people, I guess. > Phoenixgod: > see, I actually have more sympathy for Peter than I do for, say, > Snape or Draco, because of my (somewhat supported) fanwank that > Peter was broken by Voldemort and twisted into becoming a death > eater. > > > Alla: > > Oh, please don't get me wrong. IF we will learn that Peter was > tortured and /or he joined under threat of violence to his family, > he will definitely become more sympathetic character for me. Since > we don't know for sure, it is VERY hard for me to sympathize with > the character who directly contributed to making Harry and orphan. > > I was very surprised by you mentioning Draco here. Had I ever even > hinted at sympathising with him? :-) I wasn't talking about you specifically Alla, I know that whatever else we disagree on, we'll always have DD, Snape, and Draco :) I was just speaking that in general, PP inspires more sympathy in me than other dark characters that many of the people in the fandom find likeable--like Snape and Young Master Malfoy. phoenixgod2000 From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 20:31:25 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:31:25 -0000 Subject: Papal Attack - Indirect Personal Opinion now Two Years Old In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128057 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > I agree that it seems unlikely that the Pope would bother with Harry > Potter as one of his first acts/pronouncements. Let's face it, in a > world beset by hunger, prejudice, war, disease, and hatred, Harry > Potter just ain't all that important. > > ...edited... > > > Lupinlore bboyminn: I think I know where this comes from, but it's old new. When the new Pope was still a Cardinal, two years ago, he make a comment that viewed the book "Harry Potter - Good Or Bad" in a positive light in the author belief that there were hidden 'evil' messages and agendas in the Potter books. http://www.thepatronus.com/ (...which refers to...) http://www.wizardnews.com/story.200504242.html About that same time, and in all likelihood because the press/media took the Cardinal's statement as the official position of the church, a spokesmen of the then Pope released a offical Pope endorsed statement that the Potter books were OK. (Feburary 2003) http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/world/newsid_2722000/2722445.stm "But the Pope's spokesman said at a press conference: "I don't see any problem in the Harry Potter series."" "He added that the Vatican thought JK Rowling lived her life like a Christian, and that her way of writing reflected that." http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/001538.html or seach Google for more related links. Also, there were recent headlines to the effect 'Pope Ousts Harry Potter" which in reality means that the Pope's book has move to the top of some of the Best Seller list, thereby moving Harry Potter off of the list. I could see some people reading a LOT into the headline, but failing to read the article at all. So, this news about the current Pope is really two year old new which really was his personal opinion about a very biased book about the Harry Potter books, and not an official opinion on the Harry Potter books themselves. Again, I suspect the Cardinal's personal comment raised enough controvery that the Church felt a need to issue an official satement on the matter. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 25 20:51:10 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:51:10 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128058 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: GEO: > Except we all know that Sirius wasn't the servant of the Dark > Lord and he had already broken free from Azkaban the previous year > so > he really isn't the servant mentioned in the prophecy. Geoff: But at the point when Harry hears Trelawney making this prophecy, we do /not/ know that Sirius is on the side of good. This occurs in the chapter* prior to Harry's meeting with him in the Shrieking Shack**. * (POA "Professor Trelawney's Prediction" p.238 UK edition) ** (POA "Cat, Rat and Dog" p.248 UK edition) From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 21:10:56 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:10:56 -0000 Subject: Another dumb question--Halloween? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "amiabledorsai" wrote: > > > The HP Lexicon has it that James and Lily Potter were killed on > October 31. That's barely possible, given that the story in book > one begins on Tuesday, and we find out that Guy Fawkes Day (November > 5) is "next week", ... > > Does anyone know where this information comes from, ...? > > Amiable Dorsai bboyminn: The days of the week are correct, but the statement by the newscaster is wrong. According to TimeAndDate.com Holloween falls on a Sunday. (Note: Remember Harry is /born/ in 1981, but the event takes place in 1982.) So, we have the Godric's Hollow event which generally occurs on Holloween night, but more accurately occurs on the early morning of Nov 1 (Monday), then we have the missing 24 hours, which brings us to Harry being delivered to Privet Drive, generally, on the night of Nov 2 (Tuesday), but more accurately in the very early morning of Nov 3 (Wednesday). So, the timeline fits, it just the comment by the newscaster that's wrong. Although, I do have one thought on that. In the USA we have moved many 'bank holiday' from their original date to the nearest Monday so that people can always have a long weeked. Is there any chance that Guy Fawkes Day has been moved from it's historical day to the nearest Monday? Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From jferer at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 21:21:41 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:21:41 -0000 Subject: Papal Attack In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonks" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, DANCERWH86 at a... wrote: > > > > Ok so I went to look for the article and here's a link I found to > the story. > > > > http://www.contactmusic.com/new/xmlfeed.nsf/mndwebpages/new%20pope% > 20hits%20out%20at%20harry%20potter%20books > > > > Tonks: > I looked at the story. I do not see his source. I tried to e-mail him, > but the page did not load so I could not ask him. I find it highly > unlikly that the new Pope would, as one of his first orders of duty, > make a statement about Harry Potter. So that article can not be > correct. I want to know the source and date of this information and the > whole context. This was one sentance taken out of context. I just don't > believe it. Show me real proof from a valid source. If it is true I > will write to the Pope myself. The pope has e-mail you know. Course he > probably doesn't read it, but the last time I wrote to a VIP who I > thought would never read my e-mail.. he did and it made a difference. The reality appears to be that the Pope, through a spokesman, *defended* the HP books. Here's the link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/world/newsid_2722000/2722445.stm The unidentified papal spokesman was quoted as saying,<< "I don't see any problem in the Harry Potter series. "They aren't bad. If I have understood well the intentions of Harry Potter's author, they help children to see the difference between good and evil." He added that the Vatican thought JK Rowling lived her life like a Christian, and that her way of writing reflected that. >> Personally, I think the spokesman missed out on the themes of love and caring throughout the series, but he's made a good start. Pople John-Paul's last book, however, did knock HBP off #1, even if just for a little while. That's about the only attack you can get out of that. From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 21:29:33 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:29:33 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's role in the Prophecy (was: Prophecy wording prophecy wording...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128061 >>Geoff: >"But he might have chosen wrong!" said Harry. "He might have marked the wrong person." >"He chose the boy he thought /most likely/ to be a danger to him," said Dumbledore' >(OOTP "The Lost Prophecy" p.742 UK edition) >Bearing in mind that Voldemort had not heard the prophecy completely (ibid. p.743) it just does cast the shadow of a thought that Voldemort did attack and mark the wrong infant which would make for fun and games in the future....< Betsy: I've always thought, from the wording of the prophecy, that when Voldemort made his choice, whomever he chose *became* the One. "And the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal..." (OotP Scholastic, hardback p.841) So there are three requirements to being the One: born to parents that had clashed with Voldemort three times; born at the end of the seventh month (July, one would presume); and finally, marked by Voldemort, himself. In other words, it's only when Voldemort attacked Harry that Harry became the One of the prophecy. Up until that moment, it was an equal toss up between Harry and Neville. So Voldemort carefully followed rule #130 of the Evil Overlord's Handbook: "I will not order my trusted liuetenant to kill the infant who is destined to overthrow me -- I'll do it myself." (see http://www.sterlingtwilight.net/evil/handbook.html#realm ) However, it would have been wise for him to wait until he'd heard the entire prophecy. Because if he'd taken no action at all, there would have been no prophecy child at all. (Or he'd have ignored rule # 130 and sent in the trusted liuetenant.) Which of course raises the question: Did Voldemort *realize* that he'd only heard part of the the prophecy? (Voldemort realized *later on* that he'd only heard part of it, but did he know he was acting on partial intelligence when he first acted?) I can see Dumbledore playing like the spy had heard everything. Dumbledore's canny like that. Betsy From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 21:33:43 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:33:43 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128062 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mz_annethrope" wrote: > > > > mz_annethrope: > > "Must" means having an obligation to do something because of custom, > law, contract, whatever. ...edited... > > Anyway, what I'm meaning to say is that the thrust is obligation, > not certainty. > > mz_annethrope bboyminn: You are right but you have used a very limited definitions of 'Must'. It also means 'obligated', 'required', 'Complelled', as well as "5.a. Used to indicate inevitability or certainty: 'We all must die.' b. Used to indicate logical probability or presumptive certainty:"** That certainly expands the context. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Apr 25 21:55:31 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:55:31 -0000 Subject: Another dumb question--Halloween? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128063 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: bboyminn: > > The days of the week are correct, but the statement by the newscaster > is wrong. > > According to TimeAndDate.com Holloween falls on a Sunday. (Note: > Remember Harry is /born/ in 1981, but the event takes place in 1982.) Geoff: Pardon the correction, but remember that Harry was born in /1980/ not 1981. Working back from the Deathday Party which was celebrated on 31st October 1992, Harry was in his first term in the Second Year so he entered Hogwarts in September 1991 putting his 11th birthday on 31st July of the same year. So he was born in 1980 and the attack at Godric's Hollow was on Hallowe'en 1981, which was a Saturday. Just in passing, the 31st of October is Hallowe'en (or sometimes Halloween). This is a contraction of All Hallows Eve, 1st November being All Hallows Day (or All Saints Day). From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Apr 25 22:10:56 2005 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 23:10:56 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How does the WW fit into the MW? References: <1114387475.5391.98111.m22@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000401c549e3$a93bce80$704b6d51@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 128064 Sandra wrote: >After re-reading book two the other night (well, flicked through it) >I'm having trouble figuring out what parts of the WW are >accessible (either visually or physically) to muggles, and what Short answer is "none of it". Longer answer would be - none of it, unless you can get past the spells that stop muggles noticing it. >parts only exist through hidden doorways. For example, even >though the Hogwarts Express leaves from a magical hidden >platform in some kind of parallel world, Harry and Ron could >chase it in their car. They didn't go through any magic gateway... Harry and Ron are wizards. They aren't subject to the spells that stop muggles noticing it. >magical and 'switched on' than I thought. Besides, the car could >be seen in the muggle world, and must have brought the The car's an unofficial artefact. Arthur's done the work on it in his back garden. Either it doesn't have the "don't notice me" charm on it, or it's worn off (it doesn't run very well, but then it's a pretty old car!) >hidden WW place, what was the point of interacting with the >muggle world? Probably none. It's highly illegal for anyone in the WW to interact with the muggle world. Statute of Secrecy forbids it. >Following the thought a step further, they would have arrived in a >normal region of the UK - which is presumably concealed on the >usual maps? Concealing it on paper is one thing, but a >back-packing muggle could still stumble across it, surely? Possibly, but if they did, they wouldn't notice it. >And if Hogwarts is standing on British soil, does that mean the Scottish, actually >whole WW is spread around the UK (and other countries) - yet >never seen by muggle-eyes? Perhaps the concealment may be >due to bizarre spells or enchantments, but that's a little >ineffective and rather stretching things a little, I would have Not sure why you feel that the spells are bizarre (any more than it stretches the bounds of the imagination to consider spells that make gross changes in the fabric of reality). The spells seem to be very effective. Muggles, after all, don't notice... >thought? But if that's the case, would these places be visible and >accessible to muggle students who go to Hogwarts, especially >outside of school terms, in case for example, Harry and a >pureblood decided to met up one holiday at the pureblood's >house? Travelling by flue power would involve the muggle using >hefty magic outside the school... and what if the Dursleys don't >have a great huge fireplace with an enormous flue? Students who go to Hogwarts aren't muggles. By definition. They are wizards. Muggles have no magical power. Hogwarts students do. Harry and his pureblood friend (Ron?) can certainly meet up at the Burrow for the holidays. >So to go a step further, would a muggle Hogwartonian like >Hermione or Harry easily find the parts of the UK where >purebloods (or any) witches and wizards live? The reason I I like the word Hogwartonian! But yes, provided they had the address. There'd be nothing hiding the address from them (Harry of course isn't Muggle-born, his parents were both wizarding folk) >mention this is that I don't think JKR has ever made the >co-existence of the two worlds particularly clear - is it a parallel >world accessed via doorways which take a person from the MW >to the WW (in which case the whole car thing in Book 2 was a JKR mentions several gateways in (Diagon Alley, the Ministry, St Mungos, to name but three) >little odd), or is the WW all around the muggles but they just can't >see it? And if it's a bit of both, do some live hidden in the muggle They can see it, they just don't notice it. If they look at it, their eyes slide over it. It just doesn't register. >This has always made me wonder, ever since book one. The >enchanted kind of door in the first book that Hagrid led Harry into >the WW for the first time, to Diagon Alley, was part of a city >located either parallel to the muggle world, or just rendered >un-noticeable to muggles. Oh my head. Just not noticeable. They go past, but they don't see. >And then this leads onto the questions regarding why the WW >would need such a link with the muggle world. After all, as we >showed with all those ideas about the point of Hogwarts (thanks >everyone), the two worlds don't have a fat lot in common. Only because some people come from the muggle world into the WW (as Hermione did). In terms of physical reality, both worlds occupy the same world of course. The WW isn't faerie, it's next door. You just don't notice it unless you're a wizard (or a squib). Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 22:25:18 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 22:25:18 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater In-Reply-To: <20050424052020.2417.qmail@web8506.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128065 >>Subhash Sane: >[Percy] just hates for being poor. His father neither holds any higher post in the Ministry nor has much INFLUENCE, RESPECT in the Ministry.< Betsy: Does Percy hate being poor? More than Ron? Because I don't recall Percy going on and on about a lack of funds like Ron has done. His fight with his parents (or more accurately with his father) had to do more with his father not being loyal to the Ministry rather than money. (OotP scholastic hardback p.72). >>Sunhash Sane: >Arthur Weasley had never sacrificed his moral values for a bit of GOLD. That's why he didn't get that bit of GOLD. This fact even applies to our muggle world where people of Gryffindor nature stick to one place only without giving up and without giving away moral values and on the other hand, Slytherin natured people just go higher and higher and become rich, famous by sacrificing their moral values if it is the need of the hour. This is how it is.< Betsy: I think you're making some sweeping generalizations here. I'm not sure that the HP books bare out that all Gryffindors' are self- sacrificing and noble (see Peter Pettigrew) and all Slytherins' will do anything for money (see Snape, who good or evil doesn't seem all that rich, nor obsessed with money). I would also point to Fred and George who seem well on their way to being quite successful entrepreneurs. Not that there's anything morally wrong with their business and ambition, but they are interested in being successful. I *do* think Arthur Weasley is not beholden to money or even power. But I think Percy was more bothered by his father's lack of political ambition than his interest in riches. >>Subhash Sane: >Though Percy was in Gryffindor, he was more Slytherinish. He hated his father for not giving up THAT ATTITUDE. He started living alone and away from his brothers, in his own room because of the fact that they were also supporting his father and mother.< Betsy: I never got the sense that Percy disliked either of his parents while he was living at home. (Ron had his own room too, I believe. I think the twins were the only ones sharing.) His frustration came about because his parents weren't properly supportive of his sudden rise in power. His father out and out stated that Percy did not get his promotion on his own merits, something that appeared to enrage Percy. I *do* think that Percy, once starting work at the Ministry, was bothered by how his father was treated, and by his father's acceptence of said treatment. However, I would also argue that Percy was more "Gryffindorish" in his expression of his frustration. He straight up told his parents what was bothering him and then moved out of their house. Was what he did kind? No, but it wasn't underhanded or sneaky. >>Subhash Sane: >The attitude of `Why can't I have something that he/she has? Why I own everything is rubbish?'< Betsy: Again, this is a complaint we hear from Ron, not Percy. >>Subhash Sane: >His affection towards his mother and father existed till his parents take care of everything he wanted. We have seen in the first few books that Mr. and Mrs.Weasley tried to satisfy his needs, which were possible for them. But Percy wanted much much more than that. The relationship between Percy and his parents became more and more turbulent. Day by day, he was becoming more and more rebellious.< Betsy: I'd really need to see some canon in support of this theory. Because from what I can recall, Percy was his parents' (especially his mother's) number one supporter. He took his role of older sibling very seriously and tried to stand in for Arthur and Molly while at school. I do think he was a bit disillusioned when he went to work at the Ministry and saw what a joke his father's position was considered, but I never got the sense that Percy sucked up to his folks to get what he wanted while secretly holding them in contempt. >>Subhash Sane: >He wanted to get out and build his own world, build his own identity at any cost. He was seeking for opportunity, for an excuse to get out and fortunately for him, he got one. His parents believed Dumbledore and Harry and tuned to join him and at that time, he knew that his time has come at last. So, he left his parents and joined the hands with those people who can give him a bit of power.< Betsy: Except the way Ron tells the story, Percy got promoted by Fudge, and his father turned on *him*. Percy came home quite pleased with his promotion, and it was only *after* Arthur told Percy he was being used as a spy that Percy blew up at his parents and broke all ties with them (possibly to make sure he *couldn't* be used as a spy on his family). >>Subhash Sane: >What is the state of mind of Percy Weasley right now? One part of him must be telling him that it is entirely his fault and he must apologise for it. But the second part of him is telling him not to surrender because going back to his parents will bring back all that suffering because of which he got out of the house. So, he is in dilemma right now. >Now, here comes the role of Lord Voldemort who is an excellent talent hunter and thus, in need of recruiting more and more people in death eaters' squad.< >He will start telling and proving through his plots that Percy is working for him. He will make sure that everyone believes this and when it will be a dead-end for Percy...< Betsy: Now this horrible and tragic end I *can* see occurring. (Though, gosh, I hope it doesn't!) Percy's definitely been the weakest member of the Weasley clan, the one the others would most likely let fall. And it will be interesting to see how he manages the fallout likely to occur within Fudge's circle at the Ministry. I have hopes that Percy is too clever to be taken out so easily. But I also have hopes that Percy has been acting as Dumbledore's spy all along. We shall see. Betsy From bboyminn at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 22:32:52 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 22:32:52 -0000 Subject: Another dumb question--Halloween? - Corrected Dates. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > bboyminn: > > > > The days of the week are correct, but the statement by the > > newscaster is wrong. > > > > ... (Note: Remember Harry is /born/ in 1981, but the event takes > > place in 1982.) > Geoff: > Pardon the correction, but remember that Harry was born in /1980/ > not 1981. > > ...edited... > bboyminn: You are right, and the Lexicon agrees with you. I'm not sure what I was thinking. Quick Reference Calendar- http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/index.html?year=1981&country=1 As you can now see, Holloween falls on a Saturday, and Tuesday is Nov 3, Guy Fawkes would be Thursday, Nov 5. I must confess though, even though I got the year wrong, the days of the week worked out better using 1982. Using 1981, would imply that Harry was deliver to the Dursleys on late at night on Nov 3, which would imply that was actualy after midnight, making the real date Nov 4, 1981 (Wednesday morning). Not sure if the helps with the original question at all, but there it is. Steve/bboyminn From chspnll at aanet.com.au Mon Apr 25 23:45:42 2005 From: chspnll at aanet.com.au (Chris Parnell) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:45:42 +1000 Subject: The Media, The Pope and Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <1114466149.15034.61619.m6@yahoogroups.com> References: <1114466149.15034.61619.m6@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <200504260945420796.006F93F7@mail.aanet.com.au> No: HPFGUIDX 128067 Hi The New Pope was elected and already had poor PR (particularly in the last 15 years) as he was the Vatican Official responsible for keeping doctrine within set boundaries. Those who did not like that, openly criticised Cardinal Ratzinger. Upon election, headlines called him God's Rottweiler, German Shepherd and attempted to cast a pall over the new papacy. Here is an overview of why: http://www.nationalcatholicreporter.org/update/conclave/pt041905e.htm Note the author of that document; John L Allen Jr. of the National Catholic Reporter. He started all of this Harry Potter and Vatican media rounds, and it was HIS question at the Press Release for a Vatican Document on the New Age, which Fr. Don Peter Fleetwood replied to and was taken up worldwide. Allen gave Fleetwood a scoop which somewhat snowballed. Here is Allen's story from 2003: you can read it here http://natcath.org/NCR_Online/archives2/2003a/022103/022103l.htm Vatican official has kind word for Harry Potter?s magical world Since the first Harry Potter novel appeared in 1997, the series has won a massive popular following. The four titles have sold 116 million copies worldwide and been translated into 47 languages. The two movies have made an eye-popping combined total of $577,184,733 at the box office. The series, about a group of intrepid young wizards and their adventures, has also earned a small but dogged league of critics on the Christian right who fault the books and movies for promoting a positive view of magic. That?s the reason, for example, Pastor Jack Brock staged a ?holy bonfire? in December 2001 at the Christ Community Church in Alamogordo in southern New Mexico to torch the books. ?These books encourage our youth to learn more about witches, warlocks and sorcerers, and those things are an abomination to God and to me,? said Brock, 74. ?Harry Potter books are going to destroy the lives of many young people.? Such reactions have not been confined to evangelical Protestants. In Memphis, Tenn., two Catholic schools said in 2001 they were keeping Harry Potter books off shelves because of their witchcraft content. Canadian Catholic Michael O?Brien, author of A Landcape with Dragons: The Battle for Your Child?s Mind, argues the Potter series ?has the potential of lowering a child?s guard to the actual occult activity in the world around us, which is everywhere and growing.? In Mexico, the Catholic newspaper Desde la Fe warned in November 2001 that in the Potter series ?the rationality of science is replaced by a certain Gnosticism reachable only by the ?initiates,? in keeping with ?New Age? currents.? In this context, the endorsement of the Harry Potter series by a Vatican official seems especially significant. During a Feb. 2 news conference for a document on the New Age movement, NCR asked Vatican officials to weigh in on the controversy surrounding Harry Potter. Fr. Peter Fleetwood, an Englishman who is a former official of the Pontifical Council for Culture, responded. ?No one in this room grew up without images of magicians, witches, spirits and angels,? Fleetwood said. ?These are not bad things, and I certainly don?t think Harry Potter is flying some kind of anti-Christian banner. ?As far as I can tell, the chief concern of the author is to help children to understand the conflict between good and evil. This seems very clear. ?The author, J.K. Rowling, is a Christian. She may not be practicing in the way a priest might like, but she is a Christian by conviction in her way of living and in her writing. I don?t see the least problem in the Harry Potter films,? Fleetwood said. A slightly more guarded perspective came from Teresa Os?rio Gon?alves, a laywoman who heads a working group for sects and new religious movements in the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue. ?We can?t ignore the promotion of magic in contemporary culture,? she said. ?It is an element of the New Age.? Yet Gon?alves also shrank from a negative verdict on Harry Potter. ?It takes equilibrium to judge these things,? she said. ?We must assess their fruits among the young people. The family also makes a great difference in what kind of influence a book or movie may have, what effect images of darkness and of monsters produce.? The positive Vatican assessment was not the first kind word from Catholic officialdom on Harry Potter. The U.S. bishops? review of the first film was equally enthusiastic. ?Parents concerned about the film?s sorcery elements should know that it is unlikely to pose any threat to Catholic beliefs,? the bishops? reviewer wrote. ? Harry Potter is so obviously innocuous fantasy that its fiction is easily distinguishable from real life. Harry uses his ?magical powers? for good to fight evil.? -- John L. Allen Jr. ====================================== The Foundation for the Family contacted Father Fleetwood, who has amplified and clarified some issues: (inicating that the headlines were quite bizzarre:) Here are some key excerpts from his correspondence: S.W. - Do you agree with the headlines: a. "The Vatican approves of the magic and occult practices described in the Harry Potter book"? b. "The Vatican Gives Its Blessing to Harry Potter"? c. "The Vatican gives its seal of approval to Harry Potter"? Fr. F - It is helpful for people who were not present at the press conference to know exactly what happened there. Cardinal Paul Poupard, President of the Pontifical Council for Culture, and Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald, President of the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue, presented the document Jesus Christ, The Bearer of the Water of Life, to a large number of journalists in the Vatican press office auditorium. They answered questions in the company of the principal authors of that document, Doctor Teresa Gon?alves, of the Pontifical Council for Inter-religious Dialogue, and myself, formerly of the Pontifical Council for Culture. As it happens, I answered quite a few of the questions, most of which - with two notable exceptions - were on the document itself. One of these "exceptional" questions was asked by John Allen, representing the National Catholic Reporter. He wondered if the new document's expression of concern about magic and witchcraft could be extended to the magic and witchcraft portrayed in the Harry Potter books by British author J.K. Rowling. This was clearly not a question about the New Age document, but an attempt to win a "scoop", a "sound-bite" that would make headlines. As the week progressed, Allen's hopes were clearly realised beyond his expectations. However, some of the headlines strike me - the one who answered Allen's question - as quite bizarre. " It is a pure trick of journalistic liberty to use headlines like "Vatican gives green light to Harry Potter" [emphasis mine], or to suggest that, while New Age is bad, Harry Potter is good. I also never said that Rowling's books were imbued with Christian principles. What I said was that they are meant to underline for children the difference between good and evil, and Rowling's conviction that, in the end, good always triumphs over evil. S.W. - Please briefly comment on the statement of Gabriele Amorth, Rome's Chief Exorcist, "Behind Harry Potter hides the signature of the king of the darkness, the devil." [Also], did you intend for your comments at the Press Conference to reflect your personal views or to render an official opinion of the Vatican? Fr. F - As regards comments made by Father Gabriel Amorth about Harry Potter, it has to be remembered that what he is reported to have said is his opinion. Like mine, it is something personal and has no more or less authority than what I think [emphasis mine]. I respect his opinion very much, but have to disagree in this case. ====================================== So we have OPINIONS and a media circus, and not official Vatican Policy. Chris Parnell Message: 19 Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:31:25 -0000 From: "Steve" Subject: Re: Papal Attack - Indirect Personal Opinion now Two Years Old --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > I agree that it seems unlikely that the Pope would bother with Harry > Potter as one of his first acts/pronouncements. Let's face it, in a > world beset by hunger, prejudice, war, disease, and hatred, Harry > Potter just ain't all that important. > > ...edited... > > > Lupinlore bboyminn: I think I know where this comes from, but it's old new. When the new Pope was still a Cardinal, two years ago, he make a comment that viewed the book "Harry Potter - Good Or Bad" in a positive light in the author belief that there were hidden 'evil' messages and agendas in the Potter books. http://www.thepatronus.com/ (...which refers to...) http://www.wizardnews.com/story.200504242.html About that same time, and in all likelihood because the press/media took the Cardinal's statement as the official position of the church, a spokesmen of the then Pope released a offical Pope endorsed statement that the Potter books were OK. (Feburary 2003) http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/world/newsid_2722000/2722445.stm "But the Pope's spokesman said at a press conference: "I don't see any problem in the Harry Potter series."" "He added that the Vatican thought JK Rowling lived her life like a Christian, and that her way of writing reflected that." http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives/001538.html or seach Google for more related links. Also, there were recent headlines to the effect 'Pope Ousts Harry Potter" which in reality means that the Pope's book has move to the top of some of the Best Seller list, thereby moving Harry Potter off of the list. I could see some people reading a LOT into the headline, but failing to read the article at all. So, this news about the current Pope is really two year old new which really was his personal opinion about a very biased book about the Harry Potter books, and not an official opinion on the Harry Potter books themselves. Again, I suspect the Cardinal's personal comment raised enough controvery that the Church felt a need to issue an official satement on the matter. Just passing it along. Steve/bboyminn From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Mon Apr 25 23:53:37 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 16:53:37 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050425235337.61659.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128068 --- Geoff Bannister wrote: > > '"The odd thing, Harry" he (Dumbledore) said softly, "is that it > may not have meant you at all. Sybill's prophecy could have > applied to two wizard boys, both born at the end of July that > year, both of whom had parents in the Order of the Phoenix, both > sets of parents having narrowly escapd Voldemort three times. One, > of course, was you. the other was Nevile Longbottom." > > "But then... but then, why was it my name on the prophecy and not > Neville's?" > "The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack on > you as a child," said Dumbledore. "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." Hang on a minute here. How does the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecy know what the prophecy is? And how come Voldemort didn't just go after him to get the information about what the prophecy contained? Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From imontero at iname.com Mon Apr 25 23:09:48 2005 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 23:09:48 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Why I do not ship H/H (wasSusan Bones - The Candidate) In-Reply-To: <8d.25a24498.2f9c3c94@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128069 Neil wrote: > Now a question for the group in general concerning Hermione > being in a relationship with either Harry or Ron. What makes > one more plausible than the other? Many of the arguments > I've heard against one pairing would apply equally to the > other pairing. I'm not saying that Harry and Hermione belong > together, but I would like R/Hr shippers to explain why they > feel their relationship would work, but Harry and Hermione > wouldn't. > Snip Hi Neil! I'll give you my personal view of why I do not ship H/H. I don't ship a specific ship according to my personal preferences. I don't really care if H/H are better suited than R/H or H/G or Harry/Ron. Who's better suited for whom is a far too personal and subjective matter to be discussed `objectively.' Each person has a different view and ideas of what a good relationship should be like. This is why we get so many heated discussions when it comes down to shipping. I respect H/H'ers views, and actually share the same values they put forward: a strong friendship can indeed be the first step for a romantic relationship (if chemistry shows up along the way). Unfortunately, our personal preferences are, er very much irrelevant when it comes down to who is going to end up with whom according to Jo. Jo is the boss; these are her books. So I prefer to pay attention to what she's telling to us in her books and in her interviews. As I see it, H/H is technically an impossibility. Why? Let's analyze the books' plot and character structure: Plot: So far, the romantic aspect of the books hasn't played an important role in the main plot line. It has been used as red herring in COS, Percy/Penelope served to deviate our attention from Ginny, and Hagrid / Mme. Maxime introduced us to the concept of `half breeds' in GOF. The main plot has a clear general direction: `Harry is the only one who has the power to kill LV and the war has started.' Now more than ever, Harry is going to need both Ron and Hermione by his side. He has also been given more friends who have started to provide emotional comfort too and who will continue to support him through out the war. Everything is being set up for the war. Loosing his best friend is a luxury Harry cannot afford in war times. The main message is `stay united and you will vanquish.' We see this already starting to happen with the D.A. Harry, Ron and Hermione will depend on their friendship more than ever, this has been confirmed by Jo when she said that they were stronger united than divided (when commenting on Harry / Ron fight in GOF). In the romantic front regarding the trio, the only thing Jo has clearly showed to us is that Ron has `something going on' for Hermione (still doubting about it? Read Jo quotes below). This situation has provided some comic relief for us, the readers (although I suspect that many readers don't find it funny at all. Well, humour is not universal, especially British humour ;-). Now to the point, if Harry starts developing more than friendly feelings for Hermione and Hermione returns his feelings, a conflictive love triangle will be created. The trio will be divided, as Ron will surely feel betrayed by his best friends and will rift away from them. This in itself will greatly irrupt the main plot line where now the main aspects are the war, the need of unity and friendship. The main plot will then become the love triangle situation where Ron perhaps will betray Harry and Hermione out of resentment; everything will turn around Harry and Hermione together fighting against evil forces. In short, this twist of events would transform the main plot into a mixture of the O.C. and Beverly Hills 9210(?) episode And somehow I have faith in Jo not doing this Now, let's see the characters structure: We have a hero (Harry, Level 1) who's being supported by two sidekicks (Ron and Hermione, Level 2), we have `third characters' (Ginny, Luna, Neville, etc Level 3) and finally background characters. This structure is continuously changing, some background characters become third characters and vice-versa. The only stable and unchanged element is the idea of the trio (some people say that they're now a sextet, I agree, but still the trio remains unaltered). Ron and Hermione are still acting as Harry's support. According to Jo, Ron represents Harry's freedom and Hermione is the voice of reason. So, Ron and Hermione getting together wouldn't irrupt the trio balanced structure. They're the two faces of the same coin. They're at the same structural level in the books. Regardless of the relationship they develop, they'll still be there to support Harry because that's foremost their `raison d'?tre' in the books. Their romance (if there is one) would be surely just to provide some comic relief and would be limited to the background But if Harry get together with Hermione, the balance will be broken. Ron will be left out of the trio, Hermione will become the co-hero, thus the trio will be disintegrated. I recommend you re-read the scene where Ron and Hermione announce to Harry that they'll be traveling in the prefects' compartment. Harry has a sense of loss. But then again, Ron and Hermione come up later and keep up on providing support to Harry. Finally, let's have a look at Jo's quotes (only those that specifically refer to romantic relationships): Regarding Ron and Hermione: Chat with the Yahooligans, 2001 : sammyohyeah asks: Is it just me, or was something going on between Ron and Hermione during the last half of GOF? I love your books, btw, and two of them I've read straight through cover to cover in under 24 hours. jkrowling_bn: well done on the reading speed! Yes, something's 'going on'... but Ron doesn't realise it yet... typical boy. About what is going to happen in OotP, NBC Dateline Show, 2003: Couric: "Any snogging with Hermione?" JKR: (slight frown) "Hermione and Harry! Do you think so?" Couric: "No I'm kidding. JKR: "Ron and Hermione, I would say, have more potential (or did she say "tension") there" [some words were hard to hear]. (I recommend you watch the video and see her facial expression) Web site : (For Jo it is very obvious the answer to this question ;-) I agree) Does Hermione love Ron or Harry? JKR: "I can't believe that some of you haven't worked this one out yet" Regarding Harry and Hermione: JKR: *looking through questions* No, don't like that one. Oh, I like this one do Harry and Hermione have a date? [laughter] No. They are ? they're very platonic friends. But I won't answer for anyone else, nudge, nudge, wink, wink. [laughter and sound of kids going "Aaah!"] BTW, I've read that since this statement is in present tense, it only refers to GOF, but putting this question into context, (read the other questions. Most questions referring to GOF specifically say so.) we see that this is a general statement. Present tense is often used to express a general statement considered to be true by the person giving the statement. Example: `the sky is blue' (the sky was blue, is blue now and will continue to be blue in the future) `Marc and Lynda are very good friends,' etc And as Jo, who knows for sure if they would ever date, is saying this general statement, I have no reason to doubt her words. Also see how she changes from present tense to future tense in the second part of the answer. Formulae: Present tense stating general truth, and then correcting perception of what is going to actually happen. If I had any doubt about the analysis presented above, they were cleared up by Jo's straightforward comments on the matter. I have to point out to the fact that given the amount of people that ship H/Her, I have to be humble and recognize that there must be something more to it that I haven't taken into account. But, so far, I haven't seen any argument that would be based more in actual reasoning than in subjective and deeply personal matters and book interpretations on symbology, etc. Of course, if Jo is thinking about getting the couples formed after the war (something I am strongly inclined to believe), there is a stronger possibility for H/H. But from book 1 to book 7 (excepting the epilogue) H/H is unlikely to happen, as I see it, bien s?r ;-). Luna (Who thinks that Susan Bones would be a great candidate for Harry, but somehow has the feeling the girl will be Ginny) From Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 00:26:08 2005 From: Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com (unicorn_72) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 00:26:08 -0000 Subject: What are your hopes and fears for Severus Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128070 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lupinlore" wrote: > > Following up on the recent discussions about HBP and likes/dislikes in > general, here is a hot topic: > > What are your hopes for the character of Severus Snape? Where would > you like to see his character going. On the other hand, what are your > fears about where you think his character WILL go? > > I'll start. My hope would be to see: > > 1) some effective karmic payback for his attitude, particularly toward > Harry and Neville; > 2) some answers as to his past and motivations; > 3) some genuine growth and change in his character, to the point he is > able to admit he has been wrong; > > Where I fear he IS going is: > > 1) his inability to control his feelings with regard to Harry will > lead to disaster, > 2) I think he will end up being on the good side in the end, but the > cost of his "redemption" will be his death; > 3) I doubt we will ever see any real growth in his character; > > Thoughts? Additions? Screams? Rotten Tomatoes (my dog loves 'em)? > > > Lupinlore KarentheUnicorn's Reply: I'd say, I have to agree with just about everything you said. I hope to see more about why Dumbledore trust Snape, instead of, well I stuck up for him because he deserved a second chance, or its private....I mean, how private can this thing be. So, I put Dumbledore and JRK in the same position, they are hinting at stuff, but not giving us our steak and potato's like we want. Ok, I've seen the quotes posted 100's of times about well JKR says he's horrible, okay yea..most of the people that even like him as a character can admit he is horrible, but he is not always horrible....so he is a veritable contradiction of sorts. I also consider that every time Snape is brought up to JKR she switches to speak about other characters or...blows off questions...sorta like Dumbledore...(the two are obviously working together!!!) I do fear that JKR will kill off Snape, and to me that will be too expected because, almost everyone expects it, so if she does I'm going to complain about the "you people have been watching to much Star Wars" quote, because if she kills off Snape, it will be too much like Star Wars to me. I have no idea why I think that, it just will..meh. I do want his character to grow, but he is a Slytherin, I would hate to see a total reversal of his character. Honestly, I really would appriciate a Happy ending for all my favorite Characters, Snape, Harry, Dumbledore, Hermione, Ron...who else do I like..hum...sadly, I like almost everyone...be it the few exceptions..Draco, Lucius, LOCKHART...arg...oh yea, Harry's worthless Muggle Relitives..I mean come on, if I had a Harry Potter living with me..darn it I'd be nice to him, I'd want him to move back it and do nifty magic cleaning for me later LOL..idiot muggles! hehe KarentheUnicorn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 01:01:20 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 01:01:20 -0000 Subject: What are your hopes and fears for Severus Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128071 Lupinlore: What are your hopes for the character of Severus Snape? Where would you like to see his character going. On the other hand, what are your fears about where you think his character WILL go? Where I fear he IS going is: 1) his inability to control his feelings with regard to Harry will lead to disaster, 2) I think he will end up being on the good side in the end, but thecost of his "redemption" will be his death; 3) I doubt we will ever see any real growth in his character; Alla: Well, I stated just about ten thousand times that I agree with your hopes for Snape, so I am not going to say it again, but I did want to comment on one of your fears. I am still thinking about Peter and I am more and more inclined to think that he will die by saving Harry and thus earning redemption. If such thing happens, I think that doing the same thing with Snape will be a bit duplicative. I mean it is not a certainty, but a posibility. Nuh, I think that Snape just may survive. :-) As to the first fear of yours, I think it may play out just fine too, IF it will happen. Maybe , it will finally help Snape to see Harry for himself. You know, Harry not holding such disaster against Snape, blah, blah, blah. Accordingly it may lead to his character growth or it may not, since he IS secondary character after all. Just my opinion, Alla. From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 01:27:27 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 01:27:27 -0000 Subject: Nel Question # 6. Peter Pettigrew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128072 Alla: Peter does not say - he( Voldemort) made me do it, etc,etc, etc.... He says instead "He - he was taking over everywhere!" gasped Pettigrew. "Wh- what was there to be gained by refusing him?" - PoA, p.374, paperback. Phoenixgod: he also says "what could I have done? The dark lord...you have no idea...he has weapons you can't imagine...I never meant it to happen..." I see what your saying but to me, this part reads true and it sounds like he was at the wrong end of the dark lords wand for a while. Alla: This is a VERY good quote, IMO. Again, I am not dismissing torture as a possibility, not at all. It is just to me Peter does not behave like someone who was tortured and broken and REALLY regrets what he did. Actually, do you mind addressing the point Potioncat raised? If Peter indeed was broken and twisted into joining Voldie and Co, why didn't he talk with Dumbledore about it during the year he was passing on the info to Voldie? I mean, really, do we have any doubts that Dumbledore would have given him a second chance? :-) This actually will be a time when I would fully support a "second chance", since I absolutely believe that person should not be held accountable for telling secrets under torture or REAL threat of such. Alla earlier: Oh, I agree that Peter owed his loyalty to Potters and others as fellow members of the resistance, no question in my mind. What I was getting at, I guess, was more personal level of loyalty? In particular, the dismissive attitude of James and Sirius in the pensieve scene. Phoenixgod: That just sounded like friends guy mocking to me. My friends and I still do it to each other all the time. You should hear some of the things we call each other. anyone who didn't know us would think that we hated each other, but I've known each one of them for about fifteen years. I saw that scene much more innocently than a lot of other people, I guess. Alla: LOL! Am I glad to hear that or what? ;-) I hold the same view as you do, I was just trying to argue the "other side" ( not sure how succesfully). I find it very hard to believe that James and Sirius shared quite a few things with peter did not think of him as real friend. Phoenixgod: I wasn't talking about you specifically Alla, I know that whatever else we disagree on, we'll always have DD, Snape, and Draco :) I was just speaking that in general, PP inspires more sympathy in me than other dark characters that many of the people in the fandom find likeable--like Snape and Young Master Malfoy. Alla: Well, yes, we do ( except I have love/hate relationship with Snape :) and you appear to simply hate him. If I see Peter feeling any kind of regret for what he did, I would feel sympathy for him, not now though. You know why else I feel this way? Graveyard. For someone who supposed to feel some kind of regret AND share life debt with Harry, Peter was waaaay too eager to take Harry's blood and kill Cedric. Unless you share Pippin's view that there was another Wormtail in the vicinity. :-) Alla earlier: Sirius in the Shack tells Peter that he should have died just as they would have died for him. Would they? a_svirn: Yes, I think they would. In fact, Sirius did. Alla: I agree with you that they would have died for Peter, but could you clarify yours "In fact, Sirius did."? Are you saying that Sirius in fact died for Peter? Sorry, I am a bit confused. Alla earlier 2. In her well known quote JKR talks about Peter as someone who out of cowardice will stand in the shadow of the strongest person. a_svirn: Well, JKR would know, wouldn't she? She is the one who created him after all. As for reasons to befriend James and Sirius: aside from that already mentioned, they were fun to be with and were prepared to tolerate him. If it wasn't for the little matter of saving his neck Peter would much prefer their company to that of Voldemort. Alla: LOL! Well, yes, JKR will know better than anyone else. I was just wondering whether there are sides to Peter's personality which we have not seen yet. Just my opinion of course, Alla. From BrwNeil at aol.com Tue Apr 26 01:51:58 2005 From: BrwNeil at aol.com (BrwNeil at aol.com) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 21:51:58 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP: Why I do not ship H/H (wasSusan Bones - The Can... Message-ID: <1c9.27673f61.2f9ef8be@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128073 In a message dated 4/25/2005 8:20:53 PM Eastern Standard Time, imontero at iname.com writes: No: HPFGUIDX 128074 I was just thinking, that it could be possible that Dumbledore is an Animagus. He states himself in the OOTP that he has been watching Harry more closely than he could ever imagine. the only way that seems this possible it by pulling what Rita Skeeter did . It could be that Dumbledore like Rita is a small insect, and has been following Harry around without him knowing. Brodeur [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kjones at telus.net Tue Apr 26 02:24:56 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 19:24:56 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <426DA678.7000203@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 128075 Geoff: > But at the point when Harry hears Trelawney making this prophecy, we > do /not/ know that Sirius is on the side of good. This occurs in the > chapter* prior to Harry's meeting with him in the Shrieking Shack**. > > * (POA "Professor Trelawney's Prediction" p.238 UK edition) > ** (POA "Cat, Rat and Dog" p.248 UK edition) Kathy writes: I'm still not convinced that Sirius is a good guy. It seems too obvious, the way that JKR plays with Snape's character. Sirius was the one to first lay violent hands on Harry. The Order believed that there had been a spy for a year before Voldemort got his and I don't think that Pettigrew was smart enough or had the guts to pull that off. Nowhere in canon did it say that Pettigrew knew where the Potters were hiding, but Sirius went right to the house in time to lend his motorcycle to Hagrid (depending on how a person feels about the time sequence). Sirius had been locked up for twelve years which was repeated a couple of times in his discussion in the Shrieking shack. Pettigrew was in hiding for twelve years and didn't seem to want to go to Voldemort but could not go anywhere else. His confinement for twelve years was mentioned twice as well. There was obvious emphasis on the twelve years. We are supposed to wonder. And then add to that the fact that Bellatrix, the meanest of the mean, only hit Black, a fairly mean, powerful wizard with what appears to be a stunning spell. Surely she could do better than that. Now, if Snape is meant to be the one who has left him forever, and Karkaroff is the coward, that could easily leave Sirius comfortably sitting in the pumpkin patch to see how it all came out. Crouch denied Voldemort during his trial. Why would V call Crouch his most faithful servant. Sirius' discomfort at Grimauld Place could just as easily been caused by not being allowed out to assist Voldemort as from not being allowed to assist the Order. In fact, Dumbledor could have stuck him there to keep him away from people and keep an eye on him. Sirius could easily have set Pettigrew up to be the fall guy by making him vulnerable to Voldemort, giving him the information to spill to Voldemort, making Pettigrew believe that he had given up the Potters. Sirius would have wanted Pettigrew dead so that the whole story could not come out. I don't think Lupin had a clue and I think that the whole dialogue at the shack was set up in such a way that while it seemed straight-forward, it might well not have been. For what it's all worth. I can't wait for Book 6 KJ From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 03:16:16 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 03:16:16 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an Animagus? In-Reply-To: <79.44388692.2f9eef09@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128076 Brodeur wrote: I was just thinking, that it could be possible that Dumbledore is an Animagus. He states himself in the OOTP that he has been watching Harry more closely than he could ever imagine. the only way that seems this possible it by pulling what Rita Skeeter did . It could be that Dumbledore like Rita is a small insect, and has been following Harry around without him knowing. vmonte responds: Yes, we've talked about this before. There are at least two scenes that I can remember in which Harry notices a wasp that is flying near him. Once was during his exams, he was looking out the window during his History exam and saw it. And the other time I believe Ron almost killed a wasp that was flying around him. So, yes, the wasp could be Dumbledore. Especially since the name Dumbledore means bee. Vivian By the way, I wonder if Fred or George are Animagi. Maybe the map revealed that secret spell/potion(?) to them too. From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 03:32:31 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 03:32:31 -0000 Subject: Things I like/hate about HP - was Re: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128077 AyanEva wrote: 8) Nymphadora Tonks. I don't hate her so much as distrust her. I can't quite put my finger on it, and maybe it'll turn out to be nothing, but I wouldn't let her near any sensitive information. SSSusan responded: I don't *dis*like Tonks, actually, but her character just kind of bugged me. I see some potential for her, though, if JKR will flesh her out more. vmonte now: I agree with both of you. Something bothers/bugged me about the night that Mr. Weasley was attacked by the snake. Tonks was supposed to be working at the DoM instead of Arthur that night, but she asked him to cover for her (something about her being too tired). Vivian From tonks_op at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 04:05:11 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 04:05:11 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an Animagus? In-Reply-To: <79.44388692.2f9eef09@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128079 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, martyb1130 at a... wrote: > > I was just thinking, that it could be possible that Dumbledore is an > Animagus. He states himself in the OOTP that he has been watching Harry more closely than he could ever imagine. the only way that seems this possible it by pulling what Rita Skeeter did . It could be that Dumbledore like Rita is a small insect, and has been following Harry around without him knowing. Tonks: I think that DD could be an Animagus. But I think that he can do even more than that. I think that DD knows more advanced methods of observation and travel. I think that DD can be many places at the same time. That is not as odd at it seems. There are real reports of real people (such as St. Padre Pio) that could do that. (The US intellegence people can do it too.. And Shaman do it...Bilocate. it is done with the power of the mind.) I think that DD is the most powerful wizard of all time, and as such he can do more than just be an Animagus. Also I don't think that he would be one without being properly registered. From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 06:04:36 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:04:36 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? In-Reply-To: <20050425235337.61659.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128080 > magda? > > Hang on a minute here. How does the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecy > know what the prophecy is? And how come Voldemort didn't just go > after him to get the information about what the prophecy contained? > DD never said who that is to Harry. And maybe LV did go after said person...or... Maybe LV does't know who it is, and it's a well guarded secret? (Since it IS in the DOM ya know there's probably mystery around it.) I suspect he probably sent his DE after him, whomever that is, and was unsuccessful, I'm assuming this based on what happened to those who tried to go after the prophecy in the first place, no dice. Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 06:17:07 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:17:07 -0000 Subject: Things I like/hate about HP - was Re: Things I like about Harry Potter In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128081 > vmonte now: > I agree with both of you. Something bothers/bugged me about the night > that Mr. Weasley was attacked by the snake. Tonks was supposed to be > working at the DoM instead of Arthur that night, but she asked him to > cover for her (something about her being too tired). > > Vivian Chys: The only thing that gets to me about her is her original personaliy- she stands out in a crowd because of her behaviour, and she's kinda clutsy. I just chalked that tiredness up to the way she scrunches up her face when she uses her special ability. It tires her out, I think just to maintain it. (Not like with the animagus form, this is taking a form that is not in any way natural to you. Obviously she would be using this ability non stop and probably changing it on a dime as she's at the DOM, working for the order.) In other words, I didn't bat an eye at it. Just took it for what it was. Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 06:22:34 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:22:34 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128082 > Tonks: > I think that DD could be an Animagus. But I think that he can do even > more than that. I think that DD knows more advanced methods of > observation and travel. I think that DD can be many places at the same > time. That is not as odd at it seems. There are real reports of real > people (such as St. Padre Pio) that could do that. (The US intellegence > people can do it too.. And Shaman do it...Bilocate. it is done with the > power of the mind.) I think that DD is the most powerful wizard of all > time, and as such he can do more than just be an Animagus. Also I don't > think that he would be one without being properly registered. Chys: What about the time he popped in on Harry while he was watching the mirror of erised? Had he been invisible or something? I don't get it. (Ok, so you can't apparate in Hogwarts, but Fawkes and the elves have no problem with popping in and out...) Did he mention something about being invisible at that time? (does not have references on me.) About being registered, come on, he's pretty out in the open about everything. He's able to keep his secrets quite well. Strategic advantage there. I don't think there's any need to register. This would also be putting a bite on the theory that your animagus and patronus are one and the same form- if his is a phoenix patronus with an animagus form of bumblebee or wasp-whatever. It doesn't float, if that's the case as JKR seemed to hint with Hermione's patronus in the ROR. Chys From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Apr 26 06:33:59 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 06:33:59 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? In-Reply-To: <20050425235337.61659.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128083 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Magda Grantwich wrote: Magda: > Hang on a minute here. How does the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecy > know what the prophecy is? And how come Voldemort didn't just go > after him to get the information about what the prophecy contained? Geoff: Dumbledore knew what was in the prophecy and I assume that he felt it important that a copy be placed in the Hall of Prophecy. So I would anticipate that the keeper would have some idea of its content when it was committed to his care; there has got to be some sort of indexing system to retrieve the records kept in the archive. From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue Apr 26 08:43:31 2005 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 08:43:31 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128084 I think the most interesting thing about the prophecy is revealed if you compare both of Trelawney's prophecies: No.1 IT WILL HAPPEN TONIGHT. 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 HE WAS. TONIGHT... BEFORE MIDNIGHT...THE SERVANT...WILL SET OUT...TO REJOIN...HIS MASTER.... No. 2 The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies... and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have powers that the Dark Lord knows not... and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives... the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies... Firstly, you must remember that JKR is an English teacher. Her grammar would be flawless. Prophecy 1 is punctuated correctly, with concise sentences. Prophecy 2 is NOT!! It is one long rambling sentence. Most damning of all is the presence of so many 'and's. You cannot construct a sentence this way. Conclusion - Dumbledore was only allowing Harry to hear certain parts of the prophecy, not the whole prophecy. Perhaps this is why DD was so uncomfortable talking to Harry about this. Once again he is not telling Harry the WHOLE truth! Brothergib From vmonte at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 11:18:05 2005 From: vmonte at yahoo.com (vmonte) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 11:18:05 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley - Just Stupid or Secret Order Member... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128085 Subhash Sane wrote: Though Percy was in Gryffindor, he was more Slytherinish. He hated his father for not giving up THAT ATTITUDE. He started living alone and away from his brothers, in his own room because of the fact that they were also supporting his father and mother. vmonte responds: You know, there actually is a lot about Percy that we don't really know. There must be some reason he was originally sorted into Gryffindor. Perhaps the hat can somehow tell that Percy will do the right thing in the end. I think that Percy has made a huge mistake. In trying to get some recognition for himself, he has forgotten his values. I think that he will eventually realize what he has done, as well as gotten himself into, and he will then do the right thing-JMO. I also have a feeling that his mother will die, hopefully not because of some stupid thing Percy does. She may even die trying to save his rear end, who knows. If Percy has been working for DD this whole time then he is even braver than Snape, who has the security of the castle to keep him safe at night. There are a couple of things that stick out about Percy in OOTP. During Harry's trial, Dumbledore did not dare look at Harry directly. We later find out that DD could not let Voldemort know how close he was to Harry. (I still don't understand what this comment by Dumbledore really means. Even Harry seems confused by DD's statement.) JKR also makes a point to tell us (several times) that Percy never looks at Harry during the trial. We take that to mean that Percy just refuses to acknowledge Harry, but what if it's something else? Did DD tell Percy not to look at Harry because Voldemort would know that he was secretly working for the Order? How about the letter to Ron? Percy seems to be keeping close tabs on his family, even though he appears to have written them off. Was that letter just for show? Percy knows that all the mail at the school is being read by Umbridge. Was this letter meant to be read by her? Was he trying to mislead Umbridge into believing that he was on the ministry's side? Percy is now considered an adult right? Could DD have asked him to work covertly for the Order after he finished school?...we just don't know. Vivian From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Apr 26 13:23:01 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 13:23:01 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128086 Tonks: > > Also I don't think that he would be one [animagus] without being > > properly registered. Chys: > About being registered, come on, he's pretty out in the open about > everything. He's able to keep his secrets quite well. Strategic > advantage there. I don't think there's any need to register. SSSusan: There's really no reason to assume, if DD is an animagus, that he ISN'T properly registered. After all, when Hermione found the list of registered animagi, it was for "this century." DD is old enough that, if he is an animagus, he could well have been registered in the previous century. Siriusly Snapey Susan From c.john at imperial.ac.uk Tue Apr 26 14:09:01 2005 From: c.john at imperial.ac.uk (esmith222002) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:09:01 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128087 And another thing. The first prophecy uses complete sentences. If you break up prophecy 2 at points where the grammar is flawed , it reads thus; Sentence 1 - The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... Sentence 2 - ........born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies... Sentence 3 - ...........and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have powers that the Dark Lord knows not... Sentence 4 - ............and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives... Sentence 5 - the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies... As a teacher myself, let be very clear - JKR would not construct a paragraph that is so grammatically flawed. We HAVE NOT heard the whole prophecy!! From tinglinger at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 15:46:53 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 15:46:53 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128088 esmith222002 --- If you break up prophecy 2 at points where the grammar is flawed , it reads thus; Sentence 1 - The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... Sentence 2 - ........born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies... Sentence 3 - ...........and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have powers that the Dark Lord knows not... Sentence 4 - ............and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives... Sentence 5 - the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies... As a teacher myself, let be very clear - JKR would not construct a paragraph that is so grammatically flawed. We HAVE NOT heard the whole prophecy!! tinglinger And dont forget....{sentence fragment}... jkr is a word trickster. Pensieve is a play on pensive and sieve -- meaning memory filter. We just don't know what has been filtered out. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots where plot points and plot twists are presented with relevant "clues" referenced and sourced. From drjuliehoward at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 16:07:19 2005 From: drjuliehoward at yahoo.com (fanofminerva) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 16:07:19 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording In-Reply-To: <426DA678.7000203@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128089 Kathy writes: > I'm still not convinced that Sirius is a good guy. And then add to that the fact that Bellatrix, the meanest > of the mean, only hit Black, a fairly mean, powerful wizard with what > appears to be a > stunning spell. Surely she could do better than that. Now, if > Snape is meant to be the one who has left him forever, and Karkaroff is > the coward, that could > easily leave Sirius comfortably sitting in the pumpkin patch to see > how it all came out. If Sirius was indeed a "bad guy," why did JKR say she cried when she wrote the chapter in which he died? (I know that's not canon as contained in the books, but it was an interview.) Julie From kempermentor at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 18:21:38 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:21:38 -0000 Subject: The boys holding the prophecy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128090 Born and will be born. We see two people holding the prophecy: Neville and Harry. Both hold the prophecy at the DoM. We as readers assume that it is only those whom the prophecy is about who can take it off the shelf based on info attained through one of the DE's. But what if more accurately, only people whom the prophecy is about can hold onto the prophecy? No one else touches the prophecy, as far as I can remember. Since I'm at work for the next 12.5 hours, can someone check canon on this pretty please? Thanks. Kemper who is starting to think that maybe he's remembering it wrong and who doesn't have books to look up. Lame. From amiabledorsai at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 20:06:57 2005 From: amiabledorsai at yahoo.com (amiabledorsai) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:06:57 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore an Animagus? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128091 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > SSSusan: > There's really no reason to assume, if DD is an animagus, that he ISN'T > properly registered. After all, when Hermione found the list of > registered animagi, it was for "this century." DD is old enough that, > if he is an animagus, he could well have been registered in the > previous century. There's also the possibility that he became an animagus before registration was necessary. Animagi who developed the talent before then may have been "grandfathered" out of the need to register. Arthur Weasley surely isn't the only wizard to leave a loophole or two in the law... Amiable Dorsai From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Apr 26 20:50:28 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:50:28 -0000 Subject: The boys holding the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128092 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" wrote: > > Born and will be born. > We see two people holding the prophecy: Neville and Harry. Both hold > the prophecy at the DoM. We as readers assume that it is only those > whom the prophecy is about who can take it off the shelf based on info > attained through one of the DE's. But what if more accurately, only > people whom the prophecy is about can hold onto the prophecy? > > No one else touches the prophecy, as far as I can remember. Since I'm > at work for the next 12.5 hours, can someone check canon on this pretty > please? Thanks. > > Kemper > who is starting to think that maybe he's remembering it wrong and who > doesn't have books to look up. Lame. Geoff: This point was discussed on at least one occasion about 18 months ago. I have pulled some of the posts and pasted the relevant bits below. ==================================== Message 82231 ==================================== > Kneazle255: > Reading your post it struck me that Neville touches the Prophecy in > the MoM without going crazy. The only two people to handle it are > Harry and Neville, I think. > > I am not sure if once a prophecy globe is removed from the room > anyone can then handle it or not. Melody: When Malfoy approached Harry, after Harry took the prophecy off the shelf, he asked Harry to give him the globe. I doubt he would have done that if he would have gone insane after he touched it. I also assume one cannot don gloves and remove the globe either. Maybe Harry has to hand it to someone in order for the globe to be safe for others. It is the handing over from one of the prophesized parties that make the transaction safe. Malfoy is very emphatic that Harry has to hand over the globe before he is killed, stupefied, tortured, ::insert DE pastime here::. I always assumed Malfoy gave those orders to keep them from breaking the prophecy instead of following protocol. Probably because he makes a point of stopping Bellatrix by saying "if you smash it..." (OoP, Ch35). All Malfoy told Harry is "only people who are permitted to retrieve a prophecy from the Dept of Mysteries, Potter, are those about whom it was made..." (OoP, Ch 35). Harry passed the prophecy to Neville, which is the same transaction Malfoy was attempting. ================================== Message 82253 ================================== adsong16: > > > It seems to me that this proves that Harry is indeed destined, as the > prophecy tells us, to vanquish the Dark Lord. How he's going to do > that, who will help him, and whether or not he will survive the > encounter, remains to be seen. > > On the other hand, I also want to join the Neville Still Has Some > Part To Play In This gang. But that is another story... < > D: OotP pg. 829 US Hardcover Edition - "And then you saw Rookwood, who worked in the Department of Mysteries before his arrest, telling Voldemort what we had known all along - that the prophecies held in the Ministry of Magic are heavily protected. Only the people to whom they refer can lift them from the shelves without suffering madness. In this case, either Voldemort himself would have to enter the Ministry of Magic and risk revealing himself at last - or else you would have to take it for him." Once the prophesy is taken from the shelf, then anyone could handle it. Otherwise, Voldemort would still have to have been at the MoM to take the prophesy from Harry. But he sent his Death Eaters to bring it back to him. Hope that helps. D ====================================== Message 82256 ====================================== Geoff: Pulling together some of the comments made here, I think it is clear from the book that once the prophecy has been touched by the "nominated person", it is free to be handled by anyone. Lucius obviously believes this. I think the possiblity of using the Accio spell to get the orb into a bag was not being considered; I don't recall Bellatrix having a shopping bag in her hand when she attempts to do this early in the battle and Harry uses a Protego charm to stop her. ======================================= There are several more posts linked to these. If you want to follow the whole thread, I would suggest starting at message 82231 From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 22:25:41 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:25:41 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128093 Betsy: A breakdown of the characters in the Harry Potter books and their equivilent from the book "Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card. A task inspired by some not-quite-recent comments by Phoenixgod (yup, this is all his fault ) and some enforced time away from the computer. (Sadly, this is what happens when I'm left to my own devices.) [As a public service note there will be some spoilers for Ender's Game. Not so much for Ender's Shadow and the books of that particular story line -- but I've read them so my understanding of the Ender's Game characters have been duly colored.] Harry Potter = Ender Wiggin No brainer this one. Both boys are the sole hope of their kind, have good (in Ender's case, beyond excellent) leadership skills, and both have been likened to Christ by various readers. All Harry lacks is Ender's ruthless need to thoroughly dominate every conflict he finds himself in, and of course intense military training. Hermione Granger = Peter Wiggin A bit more controversial. Hermione *does* have a tendency to fall to pieces while in the midst of a crises (the Devil's Snare in PS/SS and the Centaurs in OotP), but she's got decent skills at figuring out how to sway public opinion and undermine tyrannical powerheads (OotP). Peter and Hermione also share the same weakness in garnering the personal loyalty of the people around them, something that comes naturally to both Harry and Ender. Hermione does a tiny bit better than Peter but neither character would win a popularity contest. Ron Weasley = Mr. and Mrs. Wiggin and/or the people of Earth Okay, Ron was hard to figure out (partially because I suspect his story will have some cool twists in the upcoming books) but at this moment he's more of a symbol of what's good in the WW. He and his family are living proof that the fight against Voldemort is worth waging. [Actually, in many ways, Ron is the "girl" of the story (something Ender's Game notably lacks - Valentine notwithstanding). He's there to get totally freaked out and thereby show how brave the hero is (the spiders in the Forbidden Forest), provide sideline cheering for the hero (every book except part of GoF) and get rescued by the hero (GoF and I'd also argue CoS. Harry was rescuing Ron's sister. He didn't have any other kind of relationship with Ginny at the time.). In fact, since Draco provided a similar role in PS/SS with the freaky sucking of dead unicorn blood scene (again in the Forbidden Forest) one could quite possibly argue that if Harry is Archie (of Archie Comicbooks fame), then Ron is Betty and Draco is Veronica. What? Too far, you say? Not far enough, I cry! Okay, I kid and also, I stop.] Dumbledore = Colonel Graff Both men recognize that their respective boy is the only hope to defeating a seemingly undefeatable enemy. Both dislike placing such a large burden on such young shoulders, and both have a father-like love for their young protege. However, Graff is quite willing to put his sentiment aside and push Ender into becoming the deadliest weapon he can form, even if he risks Ender's life to do so. Dumbledore, as shown in OotP, is not quite as ruthless, to Harry's detriment it could be argued. Professor Snape = Mazer Rackham Alright, I know the Snape haters (or should I say, dislikers?) are groaning aloud, but hear me out. The first thing Mazer does as Ender's teacher is beat the crap out of him and verbally abuse him. Of course there was no personal animosity in either action, so Ender quickly got over his anger and soaked up all he could from Mazer, something I think everyone agrees would be a good thing for Harry to do with Snape (the disagreements seem to arise over the reason for the animosity between Snape and Harry). Mazer also has personal, inside information about the enemy (as much as could be had, anyway) just as Snape has. Mazer has also given up his personal life for the cause, as has Snape (if you believe that most of his friends were Death Eaters). And both Mazer and Snape are strong allies of Graff and Dumbledore. Neville Longbottom = Bean So Bean is a character we learn tons more about in Ender's Shadow, but even just sticking to what we see in Ender's Game, there are similarities. Both Bean and Neville are fairly self-contained. They don't accumulate tons of supporters or friends, but then neither seem to require it. Both boys are seen as runners up to the chosen ones; both seem to be missing an essential *something* to becoming the One. And yet, both provide the chosen one with much needed support. (We see this with Neville at the end of OotP, and I'll admit to projecting that Neville will be of some importance in the final two books.) Draco Malfoy = Bonzo or Dink or Petra Depends on which way young Malfoy goes. If he continues down the road of future Death Eater, then he's like Bonzo, a potentially deadly enemy who'll turn out to be little match for Harry. If he turns away from the dark side (fingers crossed) then I imagine he'll be like Dink, a good but somewhat reluctant leader, more comfortable snarkily critiquing the powers that be than jumping whole heartedly on board. I could also see Draco as Petra, again heavy with the snark, but she showed Ender the ropes when he first joined battle school (and he was reluctant to be her friend - for different reasons than why Harry turned down Draco, yes, but still a slight parallel). Draco, even while Harry's enemy, has been a constant source of needed information for Harry. The Dursleys (mostly Vernon and Dudley) = Stilson Petty bullies who make the early part of Harry's and Ender's life a not very pleasant experience. Both seek out the heroes to bully because they're "different" from the accepted norm. Both are, in actuality, no match for the heroes. Something Stilson learned faster and with more finality than either Dudley or Vernon. I doubt Harry will go as far as Ender felt he had to go. But I also think Vernon and Dudley have about as much presence in Harry's life now, as Stilson did for Ender after he took off to battle school. So that's it. By no means extensive (I heard that sigh of relief!) and kinda apropos of nothing, but *I* had fun anyway. Make of it what you will. Betsy, who strongly suspects this is the first not-in-response-to- another-posting she's posted to this list From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 26 23:46:51 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:46:51 -0000 Subject: DD putting his foot down / DADA - Snape and Lockhart In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128094 Greenfirespike says: Constantly applying Snape doesn't always have to apply to apply. What I'm saying is that Snape works at Hogwarts, and has undoubtedly made clear his desire to teach DADA. Perhaps each of his first few years he submitted his resume (if such things exist in the WW) to DD and anxiously awaited a response. However, after over a decade of rejection, perhaps Snape no longer needs to submit anything. Just swing by DD's office and drop a hint. Bookworm: Your suggestion makes sense, except that Umbridge asked Snape about him applying for the DADA position: **** (OOP, Ch 17) "You applied first for the Defense Against the Dark Arts post, I believe?" Professor Umbridge asked Snape. "Yes," said Snape quietly. "But you were unsuccessful?" Snape's lip curled. "Obviously." Professor Umbridge scribbled on her clipboard. "And you have applied regularly for the Defense Against the Dark Arts post since you first joined the school, I believe?" "Yes," said Snape quietly, barely moving his lips. He looked very angry. "Do you have any idea why Dumbledore has consistently refused to appoint you?" asked Umbridge. "I suggest you ask him," said Snape jerkily. "Oh I shall," said Professor Umbridge with a sweet smile. "I suppose this is relevant?" Snape asked, his black eyes narrowed. "Oh yes," said Professor Umbridge.... ***** A few lines later Snape "looked around at Harry and their eyes met for a second." Snape was quick to take points and assign extra homework for Harry's ruined potion, but I think that was a distraction to turn Harry's attention away from Umbridge's questions. *Why* was Snape angry and Umbridge suspicious? Why did Snape immediately look at Harry when Umbridge walked away? But in response to your comment, "you have applied regularly" implies to me that it was more than just, "Oh, Headmaster, remember that I'd like the job, too." Ravenclaw Bookworm From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Apr 26 23:53:31 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:53:31 -0000 Subject: Website FAQ Poll In-Reply-To: <20050422175805.96949.qmail@web81603.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128095 theotokos wrote: > I seems to me that JKR has taken an especially long time to answer the most recent poll question. My computer shows the 2nd option "What is the significance of Neville being the other boy to whom the prophecy might have referred?" has by far the most votes at 68%. I am beginning to think this subject might be a focus of the HBP and that is why she is neglecting to answer it. Anyone else think so? Then again, if she never intended to answer it on the website why would she present it as an option? Maybe it is my impatience but I don't recall her taking so long before. > > theotokos Maybe she is spacing out tidbits before the book comes out (as well as being busy with a new baby). Ravenclaw Bookworm From elanorpam at yahoo.com.br Wed Apr 27 01:20:35 2005 From: elanorpam at yahoo.com.br (Paula "Elanor Pam") Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:20:35 -0300 Subject: Percy Weasley - "of his own accord" might mean "neither for dumbly, nor for voldie" References: Message-ID: <013401c54ac7$52d05720$0601010a@harrypotter> No: HPFGUIDX 128096 From: "vmonte" > Subhash Sane wrote: > Though Percy was in Gryffindor, he was more Slytherinish. He hated > his father for not giving up THAT ATTITUDE. He started living alone > and away from his brothers, in his own room because of the fact that > they were also supporting his father and mother. Elanor Pam says: We don't see any direct mention in canon stating Percy hates his father. At least I don't think so... I'd say that's a bit of a stretch :/ > vmonte responds: > You know, there actually is a lot about Percy that we don't really > know. There must be some reason he was originally sorted into > Gryffindor. Perhaps the hat can somehow tell that Percy will do the > right thing in the end. Elanor Pam: ....I don't think that whether he acts as gryffindor or slythering proves anything. I very much hope the HP books don't endorse the labbeling of people :/ Judging Percy is specially complicated because the fandom is usually biased against him and in favor of the rest of the Weasleys (mainly the twins and/or Ron). Also, JK's words on the subject seem to be taken at face-value.... or maybe I just understand them differently, english being my second language and all XD;; This is a good opportunity to expose a little half-baked theory of mine, though I'm don't know if this should be posted to theory-bay or something. Of course, throughout the books, Percy has consistently acted like a pompous rule-abiding ass. Yet, we've seen glimpses of a different person underneath: he seems genuinely offended by Ron's accusations on book 2, shocked when Penelope is petrified and Ginny is "kidnapped", and his walking into the lake after the second task in book 4 made many people look at him with new eyes. Despite all of this, simple analysis seems enough to justify (or at least make some sense of) his row/betrayal/however you look at it with the Weasley household. It has been building up for a while - I agree. His father had no tact - I wholeheartedly agree. His siblings treated him like crap - yes they did (I know how it feels to be the butt of every joke, it hurts). He's an insecure teenage that needs praise to make sure he's worth a penny and doesn't admit easily to his own mistakes - that's a bit of a stretch from canon, but makes sense. Still, it doesn't settle well with me. Why? Very, very few people have tried to protest to the portrayal of Percy as Fudge's sidekick, and all their arguments have led to nothing - it's all canon, it's fact. Whether Percy _agrees with Fudge's ideas_ or just wants to _secure his job_, he's been sucking up to Fudge& shamelessly, in front of ex-schoolmates, teacher and director, his own father, what have you. The Creator, as well, doesn't seem to bring up the matter of Percy in her interviews. It's as if 98% of the fandom have silently agreed that what you see in Percy is what you get. And I point at the previous sentence and scream "TRAP!!". Let the starting points for this hypothesis be "Percy doesn't agree or give a rat's 4$$ about Fudge's opinions or ideas" and "He is not trying to secure his job as of now". Let's also not forget - he's doing it all of his own accord. I'll take that as meaning he's not Dumbledore's or Voldemort's or Malfoy's or the Giant Squid's spy in the ministry. He's doing it for himself. Why would he suck up to incompetency extraordinaire Fudge? The best answer is that the position he attains now has a few advantages - like access to restricted information. He seems to be a scribe, since in the occasions we've met him in OOTP he's always been holding parchment and quills. Also, I don't think the minister's junior undersecretary (is that it?) would be barred from checking information or researching anything, maybe except what pertains to the Department of Mysteries (we don't know if the Minister himself has any say over their researches). So let's suppose he's humiliating himself in the name of knowledge. What kind of knowledge? And now I have another question. Where has Penny been all this time? Nothing was mentioned of him and Penelope breaking up, or of her travelling anywhere - actually, the last we've heard of Miss Clearwater was in book 3 (correct me if I'm wrong). It'd be possible for them to have drifted away from each other after school was over, since they wouldn't have all that much time together anymore - still, I don't see the Creator as the kind to let a character that has had relative projection in a previous book (being one of the basilisk's victims and all) just drift into limbo like that, without a single explanation why. If Penny has just mysteriously dropped off the face of the earth, then something smells fishy. And Percy would surely notice if his girlfriend went missing, or so I hope. Let's assume he did. At first, he sat down on the closest piece of furniture that could fit his backside and invited Mr. Shock in. Then he had a fit, and then he quieted down and tried to analyse the situation logically. And whichever conclusion he happened to reach, incomplete as it surely was, pointed to a lead within the ministry itself - be it that her disappearance seems connected to internal problems or that he hopes to find information on her case and related cases in there - which means finding criminal files. Of course, in the latter's case, it'd be easier for him to become an auror... but they need 3 years of training and he wants the info NOW. ASAP. In the case he's started investigating as soon as book 4, his seemingly "obsession" with Crouch could be explained in the same way I explained his relationship with Fudge: he doesn't really admire the guy that much, but will try to mellow him up so as to gain easier access to the info he needs. Who knows if he was truly working on cauldron-bottom reports? It was second-hand information, afterall. When Imperioed-Crouch was forced to stay at home, leaving Percy to take care of their whole department, Percy didn't seem to find it strange or to inquire further on Crouch's real situation. But if the position gave him easier access to the files he needed, why complain about it? Crouch doesn't matter; Penny does. Of course, when Crouch Sr.'s situation starts to become suspicious and Percy loses his priviledges, he finds himself in a pinch - he has no other sources... Then comes Incompetency Extraordinaire and offers him the position of (...fill in the blank, my book's in portuguese)! Yay! CHANCE! ....but now that Incompetency Extraordinaire goofed off, his info source is busted. What will Percy do now? That's my half-baked theory on his recent behavior. Dissect it, cut it to pieces - what do you guys think? Elanor Pam, who actually had started typing this up a few weeks ago, and found a nice opportunity to complete it and post! From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 08:20:56 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 08:20:56 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? How to contain it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128097 > Magda: > > How does the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecy know what the > > prophecy is? And how come Voldemort didn't just go after > > him to get the information about what the prophecy contained? > > Geoff: > I would anticipate that the keeper would have some idea > of its content when it was committed to his care; there has got > to be some sort of indexing system to retrieve the records kept > in the archive. mz_annethrope: Hmmmm, brainstorm. Maybe Voldemort did send one of his minions after the keeper and the keeper was Bode, but the mission didn't produce the intended results. More interesting brainstorm: how are prophecies preserved in their orbs? When the orbs are broken, pearly white figures emerge, revolve and voice the prophecy. I'm guessing that the person who hears a prophecy goes to the Dept of Mysteries, where the memory of the prophecy is extracted in a pensieve. Some sort of wizarding reproduction is done, and voila! the reproduction is contained in the orb. Just a thought, mz_annethrope From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 09:02:52 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 09:02:52 -0000 Subject: Killing Harry for Fun and Profit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128098 > > mz_annethrope: > > "Must" means having an obligation to do something because > > of custom, law, contract, whatever. ...edited... > > > > Anyway, what I'm meaning to say is that the thrust is > > obligation, not certainty. > bboyminn: > You are right but you have used a very limited definitions > of 'Must'. It also means 'obligated', 'required', 'Complelled', > as well as "5.a. Used to indicate inevitability or certainty: > 'We all must die.' b. Used to indicate logical probability or > presumptive certainty:"** > > That certainly expands the context. mz_annethrope: Sure, but let me continue to split hairs as we have the same dictionary. It's not until the fifth and final definition that we get to a meaning that's significantly changed from "obligue" or "require" (which I think is similar) to the realm of certainty or probable certainty. The latter meanings requires (obligues?) an explanatory note ("used to") for "words whose meanings do not permit standard definitions." I was not intending to say that "certainty" is an absolutely wrong meaning, but I don't think it's the best or likeliest meaning of "must" especially given that JKR and Sybil were very careful about their wording. So thanks for expanding the context, but I was trying expand the context from presumption of certainty to greater, ok greatest, likelihood of obligation. Just hoping for ambiguous readings, but wondering how Trelawney could be careful about her wording when she was apparently unconscious at the time. mz_annethrope From mz_annethrope at yahoo.com Tue Apr 26 10:08:44 2005 From: mz_annethrope at yahoo.com (mz_annethrope) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:08:44 -0000 Subject: What are your hopes and fears for Severus Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128099 "lupinlore" wrote: > What are your hopes for the character of Severus Snape? Where > would you like to see his character going. On the other hand, > what are your fears about where you think his character WILL go? mz_annethrope: Ok, here are my hopes: 1) That he remain enigmatic to the bitter end. 2) That the end is bitter, but only in a figurative sense. I want him disgruntled as usual, whether he's dead or alive. 3) That we will find out why Dumbledore trusts Snape. 4) That I find Dumbledore's reasons inadequate for me to embrace them. (My bets are on Dumbledore's reasons being that Snape confessed to Dumbledore that he helped concoct the potion that keeps Voldemort from dying.) 5) That we at least get hints about about Snape's patronus and animagus. 6) That we find out if Snape were the fly on the wall (or spider, or cockroach, or bat, or crow) that overheard the prophecy, but only if he were the one who overheard it. This might explain why he is so nasty to Neville; then again it might not. Then again, this scenario may be too cruel. 7) That Harry come to his own in his dealings with Snape (he showed hints that he's doing this when he told Snape he was figuring out what curse he'd do on Draco) and that the repartee gets really good! And now my fears: 1) That Snape will end up being just a baddie. 2) That Snape will end up being just a baddie who does something redemptive. Also noted: according to my dictionary of surnames "Snape" means either a "boggy patch" or "a place where sheep snuffle for grass." Let Snape always be SSSSnape! mz_annethrope From steamboatwilly at gmail.com Tue Apr 26 18:46:28 2005 From: steamboatwilly at gmail.com (Gary V) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 14:46:28 -0400 Subject: End of book seven - what happens? Message-ID: <693a6f8805042611466752ac5a@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128100 All this talk about the prophecy has got me thinking again about what I believe will happen at the very end. synopsis: Harry dies and Voldemort is forever banished to the room full of love & courage in the Dept. of Mysteries that Harry & Co. could not open in OoTP. 1. One of them is going to be murdered, one is going to be the murderer. (Voldemort & Harry) 2. Dumbledore said the room in the Dept. of Mysteries was full of the very essence of what Harry has in abudance and that was why he also said Voldemort couldn't stand to be inside Harry when he possessed Harry during the final fight scene in OoTP. 3. Dumbledore also said to Voldemort during that fight that there are worse things than death. Well - I hope I'm wrong about some of it but it all makes too much sense on so many levels - I don't know.... Comments? Gary V Two molecules are walking down the street and they run in to each other. One says to the other, "Are you all right?" "No, I lost an electron!" "Are you sure?" "I'm positive!" From kjones at telus.net Wed Apr 27 01:34:58 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:34:58 -0700 Subject: "Bad" Sirius (was Re: Prophecy wording) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <426EEC42.7050707@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 128101 > Julie: > If Sirius was indeed a "bad guy," why did JKR say she cried > when she wrote the chapter in which he died? (I know that's > not canon as contained in the books, but it was an interview.) Kathy writes: So she liked him. Either that or she felt sorry for Harry for losing Sirius, or she cried for a wasted life. I have met many "not good guys" who are also very charming. Maybe I just have a nasty suspicious mind. I just had too many questions in my mind about him, and the circumstances surrounding him. We'll find out eventually. JKR during one of her interviews said that she thought she had already given too much away after speaking of Sirius in the present tense instead of the past tense. He may be back somehow. I wonder, too, why Bellatrix said to Voldemort" I was fighting the animagus, Black." Why would he be referred to as "the animagus?" Why would that be important? Are we to believe that Pettigrew is referred to as the animagus, Pettigrew? It just seems to be an awkward way for JKR to put it. KJ From imontero at iname.com Tue Apr 26 17:08:55 2005 From: imontero at iname.com (lunamk03) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:08:55 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Why I do not ship H/H (wasSusan Bones - The Can... In-Reply-To: <1c9.27673f61.2f9ef8be@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128102 Neil: I've read all those quotes and what I find most troubling is that JKR > herself seems to be pushing the idea of R/H. Everything else in the books is a > guarded secret, why is she open and kidding about the dating subject, yet she > won't come right out and say that they get together. > Luna: Maybe because the shipping aspect of thee books isn't that relevant and there is nothing to hide? Maybe because in R/H specific case it is supposed to be just for comic relief? So when she says that there is something going on between Ron and Hermione it just means that they have feelings for each other and that's all. Sometimes a dog is a dog and there's nothing more to it. Maybe she doesn't say that they'll get together because they won't act on their feelings until the war is over? Or because she thinks it is implied in her statement? It is also important to keep in mind that she discovered the shipping dicussions. She enjoys them and likes to tease shippers. This only adds to the suspense. Neil: > I agree with everything you say, if in fact Ron likes Hermione. What if JKR > has tricked us all at the end of GOF and it is actually Hermione that likes > Ron. Think about it. What if Ron is actually only upset because Hermione > was going out with the competition? I realize this seems far fetched since > Fleur was a competitor and he asked her out. > > It seems strange that through the remainder of GoF and through all of OotP, > Ron never once mentioned to his best friend that he had any feelings for > Hermione. > Yet it was Hermione that yelled "Next time there's a ball, ask me before > someone else does, and not as a last resort!" Luna: You could be right... Tha's a valid interpretation. But according to Jo's quote, there is something that both of them are sharing... Neil: > JKR Quote > Chat with the Yahooligans, 2001 : sammyohyeah asks: Is it just me, or was something going on between Ron > and Hermione during the last half of GOF? I love your books, btw, and > two of them I've read straight through cover to cover in under 24 hours. > jkrowling_bn: well done on the reading speed! Yes, something's 'going > on'... but Ron doesn't realise it yet... typical boy. > snip > > Here I disagree with you, I think that any of the three in a relationship > with anyone will damage the trio, but then I'm thinking real life, not fiction. > When a boy and girl become a couple, they tend to spend less time with > their friends. EX. Harry in a relationship with Ginny, Susan or Luna would > have less time to be with Ron and Hermione. Luna: then again you could be right, if we are talking about real life. But here we are talking about a book where the characters have specific roles. Ron and Hermione's role is to support Harry. Even if they get together, they'll continue to be Harry's support because that's what Jo designed them to do. Neil: > As for your comment about co-hero, that seems to have already occurred in > OotP. Actually it started back in POA. More and more it seems Ron is missing > during important happenings. Luna: You're right. But Hermione is just performing her role as sidecick, she is not being more a co-hero than Neville in OOTP, for instance, if we choose to see her under the "hero" light. In POA, she is the facilitator that enables Harry to go back to the past. Nevertheless, most important decisions are made by Harry. At the end it is Harry alone that saves them. In OOTP, Ron is being developed as a character (prefect duties, Quidditch, etc...) more than in the other books. I don't know why Jo is doing it. Then again, in the final battle, Ron as well as Hermione support Harry. Both of them are knocked out more or less at the beggining of the fight, leaving Neville with a more prominent role. Nevertheless, I'll have to agree that Hermione does spend more "on screen" time in OOTP than Ron. Neil: > I agree with so much of what you say; I agree that JKR seems to be > indicating a R/H relationship in her interviews. Yet at the same time Ron and > Hermione continue to fight over every little thing while Harry and Hermione have > become co-heros. Luna: Again, I wouldn't say that Hermione is a co-hero... If I do, I'll have to include Neville, Ginny and Luna in the list of co-heroes... If you pay attention, in the second half of OOTP, Ron and Hermione fight a lot less than they normally do. Ron is controlling himself a lot more. In contrast, I don't see any meaningful change in H/H friendship dynamics. Hermione continues to support Harry, Harry continues to value Hermione (and sometimes feel anoyed by her, or proud of her cleverness, or he worries about her safety, as he always has) but still their relationship remains very platonic, as it has always been: no jealousy, or romantic thoughts... If Jo is indicating us a R/H direction, maybe Hermione "more on screen" time has very little to do with shipping and a lot to do with main plot advancement (no romantic feelings attached). Neil: > JKR may most certainly be headed for a R/H finish, but in the process she > seems to be building a more dependent understanding relationship between Harry > and Hermione. Luna: See what I mean? You see Hermione and Harry becoming more dependent on each other. I see the contrary. Harry has always needed Hermione and he will always need her friendship as well as Ron's, they're are his main support. But I don't see any indication of Harry growing more "dependent" on Hermione. Pay attention to how he is starting to count on Luna and Ginny for emotional support... And also on Neville renovated friendship. Harry is diversifying, thus becoming less dependent on Ron and Hermione... Neil: > Thus I have my own shipping preference, but I don't rule out anything. > We'll know whats happening if Harry ever out right asks Ron if he has feelings > for Hermione. I can't believe that he never found time to do that in all of > OotP. Harry and Ron aren't normal boys, they seldom talk about girls. Luna: Maybe because Ron hasn't admited to himslef that he has something going on for Hermione? Read again Jo's quote, Ron doesn't get it yet, but I guess he is starting to get it in OOTP. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 02:18:43 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 02:18:43 -0000 Subject: Peter Pettigrew (was Re: Nel Question # 6. ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128103 Finwitch: Yes, well... Remember it was Percy bringing the rat in... Possibly just after getting his Hogwarts letter, asking if he could take it for a pet... why would Molly say no? It's not like a pet of that sort costs anything, and the poor dear had lost a finger... Bookworm: Except that in the Shrieking Shack someone points out that Scabbers had been with the Weasleys for 12 years. Percy was had just finished school the previous year, so he would have gotten his letter only 8 years earlier. (Ron told Harry during the first trip on the Hogwarts Express that Scabbers was "Percy's old rat".) Hopefully we will find out just how Scabbers came to live with the Weasleys. Ravenclaw Bookworm From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 02:19:17 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 02:19:17 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128104 This post contains spoilers for the novels Enders Game and Enders Shadow. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > Betsy: > A breakdown of the characters in the Harry Potter books and their > equivilent from the book "Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card. A task > inspired by some not-quite-recent comments by Phoenixgod (yup, this > is all his fault ) phoenixgod2000: Man, I hate it when I get blamed for stuff :) > [As a public service note there will be some spoilers for Ender's > Game. Not so much for Ender's Shadow and the books of that > particular story line -- but I've read them so my understanding of > the Ender's Game characters have been duly colored.] Colored sadly. All of the novels past 'Game made me like EG less. I wonder what the hell happened to OSC. > Harry Potter = Ender Wiggin > No brainer this one. Both boys are the sole hope of their kind, > have good (in Ender's case, beyond excellent) leadership skills, and > both have been likened to Christ by various readers. All Harry > lacks is Ender's ruthless need to thoroughly dominate every conflict > he finds himself in, and of course intense military training. Obviously, I agree with the comparison. One thing I think that is interesting is how different the two approaches are that the authors take. HP is very much a story about children acting like children. the author goes out of her way to show children in all of their greatness and foibles. Harry's power isn't something that will probably come from training, but from an intrinsic quality that he has and Voldemort has excised from himself. Ender on the other hand is almost solely a product of training and despite the fact we meet him at a very young age is never really a child and never really acts like one. > Hermione Granger = Peter Wiggin > A bit more controversial. Hermione *does* have a tendency to fall > to pieces while in the midst of a crises (the Devil's Snare in PS/SS > and the Centaurs in OotP), but she's got decent skills at figuring > out how to sway public opinion and undermine tyrannical powerheads > (OotP). I would have compared her to Valentine or Petra. Valentine was also incredibly soft hearted--not quite up to Hermione, but who is? Petra because she is one of Enders strongest supporters towards the end and helps to train him when he first gets to battle school, in a way that is similar to the way Hermione helps Harry with a couple of pieces of difficult magic, particularly the summoning charm. I would say that the character most like Peter Wiggins is Tom Riddle himself. The whole hiding of his identity, animal torture thing, tremendous gifts misspent, and well liked political philosophy screams Peter to me. > Ron Weasley = Mr. and Mrs. Wiggin and/or the people of Earth > Okay, Ron was hard to figure out (partially because I suspect his > story will have some cool twists in the upcoming books) but at this > moment he's more of a symbol of what's good in the WW. He and his > family are living proof that the fight against Voldemort is worth > waging. Ron doesn't really have an analogue in EG, but yours works. I also see some Dink in him. > Dumbledore = Colonel Graff > Both men recognize that their respective boy is the only hope to > defeating a seemingly undefeatable enemy. Both dislike placing such > a large burden on such young shoulders, and both have a father- like > love for their young protege. However, Graff is quite willing to > put his sentiment aside and push Ender into becoming the deadliest > weapon he can form, even if he risks Ender's life to do so. > Dumbledore, as shown in OotP, is not quite as ruthless, to Harry's > detriment it could be argued. Honestly, if DD showed as much angst about what he does to Harry as Graff does for Ender, I would like him more. I also agree that DD isn't quite as ruthless as he needs to be in order to get Harry up to snuff. I think Harry might even respect Graff's training methods more than the sort of half-assed training DD is providing him. Graff never lies to Ender about what he wants him to accomplish in an effort to give him a life he can't really have anyway. Both Ender and Harry are seperated from their peers long before they know their destiny. Graff is as tough as I think DD should have been. And I think Harry would appreciate his honestly and not being treated as quite the child like he is by DD and the Order. > Professor Snape = Mazer Rackham > Alright, I know the Snape haters (or should I say, dislikers?) are > groaning aloud, but hear me out. I actually did groan out loud when I read that, you know :) The only thing Snape and Rackham have in common is that Snape should be shot into a wide elipical orbit around earth too. The first thing Mazer does as > Ender's teacher is beat the crap out of him and verbally abuse him. > Of course there was no personal animosity in either action, so Ender > quickly got over his anger and soaked up all he could from Mazer, > something I think everyone agrees would be a good thing for Harry to > do with Snape (the disagreements seem to arise over the reason for > the animosity between Snape and Harry). I don't think there is much for Harry to learn from Snape except how not to live his life. Snape isn't a war hero like Mazer, he's a nearly worthless war criminal who shouldn't be allowed near children for any reason. Have I mentioned lately that I hate Snape? I think the person most closely resembling Rackham in the novels is Mad-Eye Moody, Fake!Moody to be exact. He has the same harsh, uncomprosing teaching style that Mazer has and knows the enemy in the same way. And when he wasn't trying to kill Harry, he was one of his best teachers. just like Mazer. > Neville Longbottom = Bean > So Bean is a character we learn tons more about in Ender's Shadow, > but even just sticking to what we see in Ender's Game, there are > similarities. Both boys are seen as runners up to the > chosen ones; both seem to be missing an essential *something* to > becoming the One. And yet, both provide the chosen one with much > needed support. (We see this with Neville at the end of OotP, and > I'll admit to projecting that Neville will be of some importance in > the final two books.) I agree with you totally, except for I hope that the victory against Voldemort is more solely Harry's. I think Enders Shadow had Bean steal too much of Ender's thunder. I personally think Neville is going to be the one to get Bellatrix Lestrange and thats good enough for me. > Draco Malfoy = Bonzo or Dink or Petra > Depends on which way young Malfoy goes. If he continues down the > road of future Death Eater, then he's like Bonzo, a potentially > deadly enemy who'll turn out to be little match for Harry. If he > turns away from the dark side (fingers crossed) then I imagine he'll > be like Dink, a good but somewhat reluctant leader, more comfortable > snarkily critiquing the powers that be than jumping whole heartedly > on board. I agree with you that he, if redeemed would probably end up like Dink, but I hold very little interest in his possible redemption so Bonzo he will forever be (at least in my head). > The Dursleys (mostly Vernon and Dudley) = Stilson > Petty bullies who make the early part of Harry's and Ender's life a > not very pleasant experience. Both seek out the heroes to bully > because they're "different" from the accepted norm. Both are, in > actuality, no match for the heroes. Something Stilson learned > faster and with more finality than either Dudley or Vernon. Yeah, I doubt Rowling would go as far as Orson Scott Card did in Ender's Game. But Dudley meeting the Dementors *was* pretty satisfying so I am content. >Betsy, who strongly suspects this is the first not-in-response-to- > another-posting she's posted to this list I too have seen the similarities in the two series. I think the ultimate difference between the two is this. HP is a story about an ordinary boy in extraordinary circumstances. Rowling goes out of her way to play up his ordinary-ness (even in the face of Harry's talents) while Orson Scott Card revels in Ender's specialness. In a way the flaws of the two series are the exact opposite of each other. Hp has great characterization and (in general) character development as the charactrs go from children for adults. but she sacrifices some logic, plotting, internal consistancy (IMO). Its a story about the journey, not the destination. Enders Game is very much a story about the destination. Every second of the story is devoted to the overall goal of training and beating the enemy of humanity. The children of the battle school are in a way minature adults from the beginning. No time is wasted on awkward adolesence life and I think the characters suffer a bit from the lack. Many of the characters in 'Game lack the humanity and emotional resonace that Rowling's characters do. But Orson's plotting, logic, and internal consistancy is second to none, but the sacrifice is much of the children's innocence and personal development. There is no Ender's Game equivelant to Neville's personal journey for example. Betsy, in one of my HP fan fics, I got the plot by asking myself a very simple question: WWED (What Would Ender Do)? I thought your post was great even if I disagree with some of it. phoenixgod2000, who has a friendly piece of advice for everyone thinking about reading the books from our posts. Only read Enders Game! the rest of the series is terrible. Trust me. I have never regret reading a book before I read Ender's shadow. From mervin180 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 02:29:24 2005 From: mervin180 at yahoo.com (mervin180) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 02:29:24 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128105 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "horridporrid03" wrote: > > Betsy: > A breakdown of the characters in the Harry Potter books and their > equivilent from the book "Ender's Game" by Orson Scott Card. Angela: A character comparison from two of my favorite series. How delightful!! Betsy: > Hermione Granger = Peter Wiggin > A bit more controversial. Hermione *does* have a tendency to fall > to pieces while in the midst of a crises (the Devil's Snare in PS/SS > and the Centaurs in OotP), but she's got decent skills at figuring > out how to sway public opinion and undermine tyrannical powerheads > (OotP). Peter and Hermione also share the same weakness in > garnering the personal loyalty of the people around them, something > that comes naturally to both Harry and Ender. Hermione does a tiny > bit better than Peter but neither character would win a popularity > contest. Angela: Peter? Really? I agree both Peter and Hermione have enough intelligence and political savvy to undermine tyrannical powerheads, but that's where I see the similarities ending. As you point out, Hermione may not be winning any popurlarity contests with her over- the-top desire to be right and to do right, but Peter was quite charismatic in a rather evil way. As a boy, he charmed his parents and teachers, and tortured his siblings. As a teenager, he was able to sway the human populace into adopting a peace proposal that resulted in him having ultimate rule as Hegemon. If anything, I'd compare Peter to Voldemort. Both are adept at drawing people to their cause through charisma and/or manipulation, but will use pain and humiliation to bend others to do their will if necessary. Both characters can be ruthless killers. Voldemort thinks nothing of AKing those who literally stand in his way (Frank Bryce). Peter tortures squirrels for fun. However, Peter redeemed himself in the end (sort of) and I don't foresee that happening to Voldemort. I don't know if there is a character in the Ender series whose role in the storyline is similar to that of Hermione - to espout book-knowledge and provide a sense of conscience and of course be an incredibly loyal and good friend to the hero. Valentine may come close, as she was Ender's reason for saving earth, so that she could keep living. She was also most loyal to Ender, especially after he left battle school. She provided Ender with the emotional support that Hermione provides Harry with. When Ender didn't want to go on with school, Valentine reminded him why he had to, that there was a bigger purpose to it (albeit her letter was asked-for by the battle school higher-ups). Similarly, when Harry and Hermione faced Snape's potion challenge in their race to save the Sorcerer's Stone from Voldemort, it was Hermione who reminded Harry that there are more important things than books and learning. Of course, by the same analogy, when Harry wanted to leave school in OOTP, because he thought he was the snake that attacked Mr. Weasly, it was Ginny that set him straight. And, as Betsy pointed out, Ron and the Weasleys represent what is good about the Wizard World, why it is worth saving, which corresponds to Valentine representing, to Ender at least, what is good about Earth, why it is worth saving. In the end, I'd say no character in Ender's Game = Hermione; but many characters in Harry Potter = Valentine. Ron could also be compared to Alai, if only because Alai was Ender's first friend, Ron was Harry's first friend. Betsy: > Professor Snape = Mazer Rackham > Alright, I know the Snape haters (or should I say, dislikers?) are > groaning aloud, but hear me out. The first thing Mazer does as > Ender's teacher is beat the crap out of him and verbally abuse him. > Of course there was no personal animosity in either action, so Ender > quickly got over his anger and soaked up all he could from Mazer, > something I think everyone agrees would be a good thing for Harry to > do with Snape (the disagreements seem to arise over the reason for > the animosity between Snape and Harry). Mazer also has personal, > inside information about the enemy (as much as could be had, anyway) > just as Snape has. Mazer has also given up his personal life for > the cause, as has Snape (if you believe that most of his friends > were Death Eaters). And both Mazer and Snape are strong allies of > Graff and Dumbledore. Angela: Excellent analogy, although I wonder if Snape ever had a "personal life" with "friends" :) Betsy: > Neville Longbottom = Bean > So Bean is a character we learn tons more about in Ender's Shadow, > but even just sticking to what we see in Ender's Game, there are > similarities. Both Bean and Neville are fairly self-contained. > They don't accumulate tons of supporters or friends, but then > neither seem to require it. Both boys are seen as runners up to the > chosen ones; both seem to be missing an essential *something* to > becoming the One. And yet, both provide the chosen one with much > needed support. (We see this with Neville at the end of OotP, and > I'll admit to projecting that Neville will be of some importance in > the final two books.) Angela: Agreed, to a certain extent. It's true that both are runners-up to the chosen one (Ender and Harry). But Bean was an intellectual equal to Ender, something Ender may or may not have realized. I don't see Neville, at this point, being at the same level talent-wise as Harry. However, as Betsy points out, this may change in future books. Betsy: > Draco Malfoy = Bonzo or Dink or Petra > Depends on which way young Malfoy goes. If he continues down the > road of future Death Eater, then he's like Bonzo, a potentially > deadly enemy who'll turn out to be little match for Harry. Angela: I agree with this, as I have yet to see signs in canon that point to the possibility of Draco's redemption. I think that Petra, as the one who first shows Ender the ropes, and although is entirely loyal to Ender and his cause, sometimes causes him more harm than good, could be compared to Hagrid. After all, Hagrid introduced Harry to the Wizard World, but although Hagrid is entirely loyal to Harry and Dumbledore, his actions sometimes cause Harry more harm than help (Norbert and Grawp come to mind). Thank you Betsy, for such a fun post! -Angela From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 02:35:50 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 02:35:50 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128106 If this has been asked, pleas forgive me. I do not know how to search all of the threads. Is anyone else curious as to whose pensieve Harry and DD are looking at on the cover of HBP? I've been hoping that JKR will eventually give Harry his own pensieve, because it seems to me the only two people who really know what happened "that fateful night" would be Harry and Voldemort (unless someone else was present, of course). Further, I don't see why Harry can't have his own pensieve so he could access his memories of his parents instead of hearing second-hand how much they loved him, etc. I mean, throw the kid a bone! I know that so far, the retrieving of memories seems to be require the actual ability to recall the memories, but surely there is a spell that will allow a person to retrieve "unremembered" memories? Angie From navarro198 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 02:42:41 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 02:42:41 -0000 Subject: The Media, The Pope and Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <200504260945420796.006F93F7@mail.aanet.com.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128107 It is interesting that the primary source for this seems to be the Contact Music web site. Most of the sites I found in a search referenced that site as their source. The following quote comes from http://www.wizardnews.com/story.200504242.html: <> It sounds to me like he is reacting to what he was told about Harry Potter and Kuby's book rather than having read them himself and agreeing with Kuby. Ravenclaw Bookworm From sherriola at earthlink.net Wed Apr 27 02:44:10 2005 From: sherriola at earthlink.net (Sherry Gomes) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 19:44:10 -0700 (GMT-07:00) Subject: [HPforGrownups] "Bad" Sirius (was Re: Prophecy wording) Message-ID: <16690938.1114569850789.JavaMail.root@kermit.psp.pas.earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 128108 Kathy writes: So she liked him. Either that or she felt sorry for Harry for losing Sirius, or she cried for a wasted life. I have met many "not good guys" who are also very charming. Maybe I just have a nasty suspicious mind. I just had too many questions in my mind about him, and the circumstances surrounding him. We'll find out eventually. JKR during one of her interviews said that she thought she had already given too much away after speaking of Sirius in the present tense instead of the past tense. He may be back somehow. I wonder, too, why Bellatrix said to Voldemort" I was fighting the animagus, Black." Why would he be referred to as "the animagus?" Why would that be important? Are we to believe that Pettigrew is referred to as the animagus, Pettigrew? It just seems to be an awkward way for JKR to put it. KJ Sherry now: Ok, I'm a broken record on this topic, i guess. However, recently on this list, we discussed JKR's statements about why people take the animagus forms they do. She was quoted as saying that the animagus form comes from inside the wizard, based on their personality, who they are inside. I'm paraphrasing, obviously. I don't find either The Leaky cauldron or muggle Net to be very easy web sites to search. So, that being the case, sirius just cannot be a bad guy. Dogs are not bad. They are loyal to death. They would die to protect their pack, their family unit so to speak. They just do not betray. I've literally trusted my life and safety to dogs for the last 30 years. Nothing can ever make me believe Sirius could be bad, simply on the basis of his animagus form. sherry From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 02:48:39 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 02:48:39 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128109 Phoenixgod: Honestly, if DD showed as much angst about what he does to Harry as Graff does for Ender, I would like him more. I also agree that DD isn't quite as ruthless as he needs to be in order to get Harry up to snuff. I think Harry might even respect Graff's training methods more than the sort of half-assed training DD is providing him. Graff never lies to Ender about what he wants him to accomplish in an effort to give him a life he can't really have anyway. Both Ender and Harry are seperated from their peers long before they know their destiny. Graff is as tough as I think DD should have been. And I think Harry would appreciate his honestly and not being treated as quite the child like he is by DD and the Order. Alla: I don't know, to tell you the truth, I probably would not like Dumbledore treating Harry " a la Graff". It had been a long time since I read "Ender's Game" and "Ender Shadow", but I do remember that i thought that children in the school and Ender most of all were treated as weapons and weapons only. Yeah, I know Graf was angsty, but I never really bought it, I guess. Yes, I want Dumbledore to be honest with Harry, YES I want him to finally wake up and start providing Harry with some REAL training, definitely, YES , I want him to express more regrets, but I want him to do it more believably. Betsy: The first thing Mazer does as Ender's teacher is beat the crap out of him and verbally abuse him. Of course there was no personal animosity in either action, so Ender quickly got over his anger and soaked up all he could from Mazer, something I think everyone agrees would be a good thing for Harry to do with Snape (the disagreements seem to arise over the reason for the animosity between Snape and Harry). Phoenix: I don't think there is much for Harry to learn from Snape except how not to live his life. Snape isn't a war hero like Mazer, he's a nearly worthless war criminal who shouldn't be allowed near children for any reason. Alla: I think we should team up and join the prosecution in Snape's trial on Accio. :-) I actually think that there are A LOT of things Harry can learn from Snape. ( Hey, Susan, help me out here, if you are reading this post, will you? :-)) The problem, as I see it, is that Snape is either uncapable or unwilling or both to teach Harry that. If nothing else, Snape indeed has a knowledge of Dark Side, which Harry may need to defeat Voldie and Co, IMO. > phoenixgod2000, who has a friendly piece of advice for everyone > thinking about reading the books from our posts. Only read Enders > Game! the rest of the series is terrible. Trust me. I have never > regret reading a book before I read Ender's shadow. Alla, who TOTALLY agrees with this advice. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 03:02:41 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 03:02:41 -0000 Subject: End of book seven - what happens? In-Reply-To: <693a6f8805042611466752ac5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128110 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Gary V wrote: > > All this talk about the prophecy has got me thinking again about what > I believe will happen at the very end. > > synopsis: Harry dies and Voldemort is forever banished to the room > full of love & courage in the Dept. of Mysteries that Harry & Co. > could not open in OoTP. > > {snip> > 2. Dumbledore said the room in the Dept. of Mysteries was full of > the very essence of what Harry has in abudance and that was why he > also said Voldemort couldn't stand to be inside Harry when he > possessed Harry during the final fight scene in OoTP. > > 3. Dumbledore also said to Voldemort during that fight that there > are worse things than death. > >Angie replies: Call me Pollyanna, but I prefer to think that Harry's ability to love will save him and will somehow kill LV (otherwise, what's the point? We already know he would sacrifice himself to save those he loves). We've had hints that Harry doesn't have enough hatred to use the AK curse (FakeMoody's comment re the class giving him a nosebleed and Bella's comment that you have to "mean it" or whatever she said. Harry's attempt at the Crucatious Curse was pretty much a failure.) Because Harry and LV are "connected," I don't see why Harry couldn't summon LV's rage (which is obviously sufficient to kill) and use it against him by reminding LV of all of the people who love him (Harry), and thus, cause LV to feel love, which he can't stand. The trick would be for Harry to sustain the warm fuzzy long enough without LV somehow escaping it. It would be very fitting if Harry could harness LV's rage/hatred/whatever and then use it to kill LV. Would that be worse than death to LV? Possibly. For someone who is convinced that he is or is going to be invincible, I think the realization that he is wrong and is, in fact, going to die, and is going remembered for being defeated by the thing he despises the most could be worse than death. (Of course, this all assumes that DD's comments about things being worse than death are from LV's view, and not DD's). From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 03:14:58 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 03:14:58 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128111 I was reading some of the recent threads regarding the prophecies and it hit me: Are we certain that the power that the Dark Lord knows not is a power that he didn't know of at the time he tried to kill Harry? Assuming that Harry is the person to whom the prophecy refers (not trying to start a thread on that topic), could he still/currently possess a power of which LV (and the rest of us) are unaware? Or perhaps it is a power that Harry hasn't even gained yet? Seems like Harry either possessed the power at that time or he didn't. Even if he did, that doesn't mean that LV knew of that power then, or knows of it now. If Harry didn't possess the power, couldn't he gain the power at a later point? If the series makes anything clear, it is that the power of a wizard grows/changes over time. It just seems that JKR wants us to assume that Harry's power to love and feel love is that power of which the Dark Lord know not. But LV knows/knew about the power of love. He may have forgotten about it or discounted it, but he knew about it. So then, how can that be the power that he knows not? From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Apr 27 03:23:21 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 03:23:21 -0000 Subject: (Aside to) Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128112 Alla: > I actually think that there are A LOT of things Harry can learn from > Snape. ( Hey, Susan, help me out here, if you are reading this post, > will you? :-)) The problem, as I see it, is that Snape is either > uncapable or unwilling or both to teach Harry that. > > If nothing else, Snape indeed has a knowledge of Dark Side, which > Harry may need to defeat Voldie and Co, IMO. > SSSusan: You rang? ;-) I would include in the list of what Snape knows/possibly knows: Potionmaking & antidotes, of course; Occlumency; INFORMATION about how Voldy operates, where his weaknesses might be, what his strengths are, what he may have done to protect himself, how he uses his DEs.... Now, whether Snape is capable of or interested in teaching/sharing these things with Harry, whether Harry is capable of or interested in learning/hearing these things from Snape, and whether Snape even truly knows or believes the prophecy & that Harry is "IT," is all debatable and open for discussion. But the above is what I have had in mind when I've complained about all Snape *could* be doing for Harry & the cause. Siriusly Snapey Susan From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 03:34:22 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 03:34:22 +0000 Subject: Where is Penelope Clearwater? (was Percy Weasley etc.) In-Reply-To: <013401c54ac7$52d05720$0601010a@harrypotter> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128113 Elanorpam at yahoo.com.br asked, quite intriguingly: >And now I have another question. Where has Penny been all this time? *snip* >. If Penny has just mysteriously dropped off >the face of the earth, then something smells fishy. It certainly does. Remember what Dumbledore said about Voldemort's first rise to power -- how it was accompanied by unexplained disappearances? And we know she's a muggle-born, which might make her a more likely victim for Voldemort and/or his Death Eaters for whatever reason. And it's the *only* thing we know about her. She could have all kinds of interesting background which could explain a disappearance. I don't, however, think she's being held hostage for Percy's good behavior as a spy. If Voldemort wanted Percy as a spy, the last thing he'd do would be to have him break off with his family, thereby insuring that he would get no useful information. Just some ideas off the top of my head, Janet Anderson (But of course this may all be nothing and Penelope and Percy may have broken up, or be continuing their relationship elsewhere. Wouldn't you, if you had Fred and George for brothers?) From kjones at telus.net Wed Apr 27 03:07:40 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:07:40 -0700 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? How to contain it? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <426F01FC.20005@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 128114 > Magda: > > How does the Keeper of the Hall of Prophecy know what the > > prophecy is? > > > Geoff: > > I would anticipate that the keeper would have some > > idea of its content when it was committed to his care; there > > has got to be some sort of indexing system to retrieve the > > records kept in the archive. Kathy writes: I have a question. How can the Keeper of Prophecies just decide what a prophecy means, or who it affects, on his own and just change the prophecy orb to relate to a specific person? Does the Wizengamot make the decision? Could he have made a mistake????? KJ From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Wed Apr 27 03:13:13 2005 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (Jazmyn Concolor) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 20:13:13 -0700 Subject: Dumbledore an Animagus? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <426F0349.3000705@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128115 Amiable Dorsai wrote: > There's also the possibility that he became an animagus before > registration was necessary. Animagi who developed the talent > before then may have been "grandfathered" out of the need to > register. Or people might be missing the whole point that you do NOT have to be an animagus to change to animal form. An Animagus is when the person can change to a specific form AT WILL, without using a potion or a wand.. Meaning they must be registered because taking their wand away doesn't stop them from changing, unless you actually think that Sirius had a wand in Azkaban?? Meaning that if they commit a crime, they would need a special cell or magic(s) to keep them from escaping. Animagi only need to be registered BECAUSE they don't need a wand or potion to change like everyone else does. Dumbledore doesn't even need to be one and I see no evidence that he is or isn't. He also knows magic that Harry would not even know about, has many magical devices in his office for which Harry hasn't a clue what they do and certainly has means of knowing what's going on without resorting to turning into an animal. I would more believe him to have seer powers than think he can turn into a gerbil or a wombat at will.... No, I don't think he is one or has any reason to be one. He has plenty of tricks up his sleeve that we have not witnessed yet without being 'another unregistered/registered' Animagi.... Jazmyn From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 05:50:54 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 05:50:54 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128116 "gelite67" says: > snip > > Assuming that Harry is the person to whom the prophecy refers (not trying to start a thread on that topic), could he still/currently possess a power of which LV (and the rest of us) are unaware? Or perhaps it is a power that Harry hasn't even gained yet? > Seems like Harry either possessed the power at that time or he didn't. Even if he did, that doesn't mean that LV knew of that power then, or knows of it now. If Harry didn't possess the power, couldn't he gain the power at a later point? If the series makes anything clear, it is that the power of a wizard grows/changes over time. > It just seems that JKR wants us to assume that Harry's power to love and feel love is that power of which the Dark Lord know not. But LV knows/knew about the power of love. He may have forgotten about it or discounted it, but he knew about it. So then, how can that be the power that he knows not? Bonnie now: I know this has been discussed, but didn't I read somewhere that the fact that Harry has his mother's eyes is very important? This can't be just about the "love shield" can it? Or if it is, there must be some aspect to it that we don't know of yet. JKR says we should be asking ourselves: 1. Why did Harry survive? 2. Something about why LV didn't die (or why he became "vapormort" - I forgot exactly how it was worded)? IMO I think JKR has an ace up her sleave that we don't know about yet. I agree, there must be another power or an increase of the "love shield" that we will find out about. If Harry defeats LV now with his current tools, it will be by accident. At least so far that seems to be the way things have gone. Except for the Patronus Charm, Harry has won mostly by good luck so far. I'm sure he has a lot more Wizarding tricks to learn. Bonnie (who want to see Harry become a GREAT wizard, and wonders about his mother's eyes.) From kjones at telus.net Wed Apr 27 04:03:25 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 21:03:25 -0700 Subject: "Bad" Sirius (was Re: Prophecy wording) In-Reply-To: <16690938.1114569850789.JavaMail.root@kermit.psp.pas.earthlink.net> References: <16690938.1114569850789.JavaMail.root@kermit.psp.pas.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <426F0F0D.9050804@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 128117 > Sherry now: > She [JKR] was quoted as saying that the animagus form comes > from inside the wizard, based on their personality, who they > are inside. I'm paraphrasing, obviously. > > So, that being the case, Sirius just cannot be a bad guy. > Dogs are not bad. They are loyal to death. They would die > to protect their pack, their family unit so to speak. They > just do not betray. I've literally trusted my life and safety > to dogs for the last 30 years. Nothing can ever make me > believe Sirius could be bad, simply on the basis of his > animagus form. Kathy writes: Sorry, I wasn't clear. I didn't mean to suggest that Black's animagus form had anything to do with anything, good bad or indifferent. I just wondered why Bellatrix would call him "the animagus, Black". Pettigrew might have told V that Black was an animagus, but that doesn't explain why Bellatrix would not refer to him as "Black, Harry's Godfather" or "Black, her cousin", (which should have come to mind more quickly than the animagus) or even "that mudblood lover, Black?" It Just seems odd to me. Anyway, I don't intend to try to convince anybody of anything. I am just curious about the story. I don't have anything against dogs, I have one of my own. Frankly my dog would leave me in six lanes of traffic to save his own skin, and would not even feel bad about it. There are dogs and then there are dogs. I just think that Sirius might be a wolf in dog's clothing. KJ From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Tue Apr 26 23:20:08 2005 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 19:20:08 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: Unconcerned parents References: Message-ID: <426ECCA8.00000C.03604@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 128118 I'm relatively new here so be patient with me. I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. Most 15 yo girls do keep things from their parents. It's been awhile since I have read OotP, so please refresh my memory. Was all the fighting in the DOM taking place during the school year or during the summer break? If during the school year, I can see how Hermione kept her parents in the dark, if she did. If during the summer break, I don't see how her parents could let her out of their sight considering she's in school 10 months out of the year with only a brief break or two. If they are aware of the goings on, why didn't they pull their only child home? If they are aware of the goings on, they sure don't seem too concerned about the possibility of losing their only child. As a parent, I'm pretty dumbfounded - or in the dark. Donna From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Tue Apr 26 21:39:34 2005 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:39:34 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? References: <20050425235337.61659.qmail@web53110.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <426EB516.000003.03604@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 128119 Geoff Bannister wrote: > '"The odd thing, Harry" he (Dumbledore) said softly, "is that > it may not have meant you at all. > > "But then... but then, why was it my name on the prophecy and > not Neville's?" > > "The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack > on you as a child," said Dumbledore. The official record was "re-labelled after Voldemort's attack...."? I wonder what the original label read. Donna From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 27 06:28:09 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:28:09 -0000 Subject: End of book seven - what happens? In-Reply-To: <693a6f8805042611466752ac5a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128120 Gary V wrote: > 2. Dumbledore said the room in the Dept. of Mysteries was full of > the very essence of what Harry has in abudance and that was why he > also said Voldemort couldn't stand to be inside Harry when he > possessed Harry during the final fight scene in OoTP. ...and inspired the following brain wave in Karen (LOL!) (This has probably already been offered by someone else, but as I'm relatively new I haven't seen it before). At 'the end' Harry is going to get Lord V into that room somehow. He's either going to lure him, trick him, magic him or physically force him into that room. It is full of the very essence of what Harry has in abundance so Harry will be unharmed, but Lord V cannot stand to be near it so he explodes / implodes / vapourises totally finally and irreperably. Karen sits back with a smile, convinced that she's got it, then ducks her head slightly in anticipation of the arguments proving her not only completely wrong, but also slightly batty!! Karen From ajroald at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 06:29:13 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:29:13 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: <426ECCA8.00000C.03604@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128121 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > > I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting > her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering > if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. Most 15 yo girls > do keep things from their parents. It's been awhile since I have > read OotP, so please refresh my memory. Was all the fighting in > the DOM taking place during the school year or during the summer break? If during the school year, I can see how Hermione kept > her parents in the dark, if she did. If during the summer break, > I don't see how her parents could let her out of their sight considering she's in school 10 months out of the year with only a > brief break or two. If they are aware of the goings on, why didn't > they pull their only child home? If they are aware of the goings > on, they sure don't seem too concerned about the possibility of > losing their only child. > > As a parent, I'm pretty dumbfounded - or in the dark. > > Donna First off, welcome. Secondly, I'm pretty sure Hermione's parents are completely in the dark about all the danger Hermione has been in. The fight at the DoM was during school, as has been all the other incidents. IMO, her parents probably feel that it is best if she is around other witches and wizards, explaining why they allow her to spend time during the summer with the Weasley's. Just my thoughts... Lea From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 06:30:25 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:30:25 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128122 > "gelite67" says: > > snip > > > > Assuming that Harry is the person to whom the prophecy refers (not > trying to start a thread on that topic), could he still/currently > possess a power of which LV (and the rest of us) are unaware? Or > perhaps it is a power that Harry hasn't even gained yet? > > > Seems like Harry either possessed the power at that time or he > didn't. Even if he did, that doesn't mean that LV knew of that power > then, or knows of it now. If Harry didn't possess the power, > couldn't he gain the power at a later point? If the series makes > anything clear, it is that the power of a wizard grows/changes over > time. > Bonnie then said: > > I know this has been discussed, but didn't I read somewhere that the > fact that Harry has his mother's eyes is very important? This can't > be just about the "love shield" can it? Or if it is, there must be > some aspect to it that we don't know of yet. ...and... > IMO I think JKR has an ace up her sleeve..... Valky: The third trial under the trapdoor PS/SS - Harry has a knack for spotting things others don't see, like his mother who could 'see the good in people especially when that person couldn't see it for themselves'(Lupin in the MTMNBN version of POA) Its what Harry can 'see' that LV doesn't know is stronger magic than anything he could possess. Bonnie: > JKR says we should beasking ourselves: > > 1. Why did Harry survive? > Valky: The clue trail... 1. The AK was aimed at Baby Harry's head and left a big scar that now connects Harry to Voldemort like they were one person. 2. LV sees 'himself' in Harry!! (ie the reason he went after Harry instead of Neville, in COS Tom says he sees likeness etc) 3. Baby Harry looks up at someone who sees himself in Harry with his special ability to see things that others can't. Conclusion --- Baby Harry sees a man looking into a mirror!!! Hence LV casts the AK on himself. I should um... stop there... right? From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Apr 27 06:47:57 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:47:57 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: <426ECCA8.00000C.03604@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128123 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: Donna: > I'm relatively new here so be patient with me. > > I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting > her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering > if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. Most 15 yo girls > do keep things from their parents. It's been awhile since I have > read OotP, so please refresh my memory. Was all the fighting in > the DOM taking place during the school year or during the summer break? If during the school year, I can see how Hermione kept > her parents in the dark, if she did. If during the summer break, > I don't see how her parents could let her out of their sight considering she's in school 10 months out of the year with only a > brief break or two. If they are aware of the goings on, why didn't > they pull their only child home? If they are aware of the goings > on, they sure don't seem too concerned about the possibility of > losing their only child. Geoff: The battle at the Ministry of Magic is almost at the end of the school year. Harry's vision of Voldemort and Sirius occurred while the students were in sitting their final exam (History of Magic) and the confrontation with Umbridge - leading to the incodent with the centaurs and their departure for London on the Thestrals - takes place almost immediately afterwards. So the really ugly stuff is happening very close to them leaving for the summer holidays. Mr. and Mrs.Granger will not know about these events until Hermione is home, always assuming that she will tell them.... From siskiou at vcem.com Wed Apr 27 06:50:25 2005 From: siskiou at vcem.com (Susanne) Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2005 23:50:25 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: References: <426ECCA8.00000C.03604@D33LDD51> Message-ID: <1268675904.20050426235025@vcem.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128124 Hi, Tuesday, April 26, 2005, 11:29:13 PM, Lea wrote: > The fight at the DoM was during school, as has been all the other > incidents. I've always wondered if the school doesn't have to inform the parents if their child gets hurt. It seems like something they'd have to do, but looking at canon, they don't appear to. After all, just looking at Hermione, there have been several instances that landed her in the infirmary ( twice in CoS, and then DoM in OotP), and we never hear about her parents coming to check on her. Molly and Arthur also seem to be in the dark about the while Scabbers/Pettigrew incident. They did get called to the school when Ginny was almost killed, though. -- Best regards, Susanne mailto:siskiou at vcem.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Apr 27 06:50:59 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 06:50:59 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? In-Reply-To: <426EB516.000003.03604@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128125 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > > Geoff Bannister wrote: > > '"The odd thing, Harry" he (Dumbledore) said softly, "is that > > it may not have meant you at all. > > > > "But then... but then, why was it my name on the prophecy and > > not Neville's?" > > > > "The official record was re-labelled after Voldemort's attack > > on you as a child," said Dumbledore. Donna:> The official record was "re-labelled after Voldemort's attack...."? > I wonder what the original label read. > Geoff: My guess, for what it's worth: S.P.T. to A.P.W.B.D. Dark Lord and ? The labelling (quoted in OOTP "The Department of Mysteries" p.688 UK edition) could just have been changed with a stroke of the pen. The original date was apparently still there. From Aisbelmon at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 07:00:11 2005 From: Aisbelmon at hotmail.com (M.Clifford) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:00:11 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128126 "Donna" wrote: > > > > I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting > > her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering > > if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. > > > > > Lea: > First off, welcome. Secondly, I'm pretty sure Hermione's parents > are completely in the dark about all the danger Hermione has been > in. The fight at the DoM was during school, as has been all the > other incidents. > Valky: Second here! Welcome Donna and I totally agree with Lea. Hermione doesn't tell them anything about the bad stuff. They don't know she was turned to a cat or pursued by a werewolf etc.. and I would even guess that they don't know that DE's even exist. My best guess is that Hermione has them believing that the WW and Hogwarts are some relative faeryland with a BIG library!, essentially I think they are happy for her being there, but would probably be very scared if they knew the truth. I would expect them to start finding out in coming books though, as Hermione comes of age and more bold about what she shares with her parents. I wonder what kind of parenting JKR will exemplify in them then, now that will be interesting.. The whole scenario parallels with the kinds of issues that many parents face with teenagers. Will the dentists cry into their tea over it or move into Hagrids Hut to be closer to her, or will they try to take her out of Hogwarts? From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 07:11:39 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 07:11:39 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128127 > Alla: > > I don't know, to tell you the truth, I probably would not like > Dumbledore treating Harry " a la Graff". It had been a long time > since I read "Ender's Game" and "Ender Shadow", but I do remember > that i thought that children in the school and Ender most of all > were treated as weapons and weapons only. Yeah, I know Graf was > angsty, but I never really bought it, I guess. > > Yes, I want Dumbledore to be honest with Harry, YES I want him to > finally wake > up and start providing Harry with some REAL training, definitely, > YES , I want him to express more regrets, but I want him to do it > more believably. phoenixgod2000: I did believe Graff. I never liked him all that much because of the hell he put Ender through, but I believed that he was in actual pain from how he acted. Besides, I think that Harry would appreciate Graff's upfront nature and being treated somewhat like an adult. Of course once he started training he'd hate Graff just as much as Ender, but that part's unavoidable. Boot Camp sucks that way :) > Phoenix: > I don't think there is much for Harry to learn from Snape except how > not to live his life. Snape isn't a war hero like Mazer, he's a > nearly worthless war criminal who shouldn't be allowed near children > for any reason. > > > Alla: > > I think we should team up and join the prosecution in Snape's trial > on Accio. :-) Talk bad about Snape with other people. I am so there! > I actually think that there are A LOT of things Harry can learn from > Snape. ( Hey, Susan, help me out here, if you are reading this post, > will you? :-)) The problem, as I see it, is that Snape is either > uncapable or unwilling or both to teach Harry that. I'm sure there plenty of things that Snape knows Harry would find useful, but nothing that someone else could teach Harry more effectively or more enjoyably. > If nothing else, Snape indeed has a knowledge of Dark Side, which > Harry may need to defeat Voldie and Co, IMO. Snape hasn't seemed to be worth the trouble as a spy so far. He didn't do all that much during OOTP. Now if he were doing something useful like poisoning Lucius Malfoy and Co, we could talk, but that's a seperate argument (I still say DD is a terrible general. Ender would've whipped Voldemort in about four minutes. Thats why he's so cool) > > phoenixgod2000, who has a friendly piece of advice for everyone > > thinking about reading the books from our posts. Only read Enders > > Game! the rest of the series is terrible. Trust me. I have never > > regret reading a book before I read Ender's shadow. > > Alla, who TOTALLY agrees with this advice. Alla, do you know what happened to OSC that made him hate the character of Ender? Because that is the only explanation for what he does to the guy. phoenixgod2000 From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Wed Apr 27 11:51:11 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 11:51:11 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128128 > > Donna: > > I'm relatively new here so be patient with me. > > > > I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting > > her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. > > they sure don't seem too concerned about the possibility of > > losing their only child. > > Geoff: > So the really ugly stuff is happening very close to them leaving for > the summer holidays. Mr. and Mrs.Granger will not know about these > events until Hermione is home, always assuming that she will tell > them.... Karen now: I don't think Hermione tells her parents anything about the dangerous side of the WW, and indeed tells them only what they need to know - in GOF when she shouts at Rita Skeeter in the Hogshead "You horrible woman" etc etc, Ron says "You don't want to go upsetting Rita Skeeter. I'm serious, Hermione, she'll dig something up on you-" Hermione's response is: "My parents don't read the Daily Prophet, she can't scare me into hiding" (Chapter 24, P392 in English paperback) Karen From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 13:04:30 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:04:30 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128129 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > It just seems that JKR wants us to assume that Harry's power to love > and feel love is that power of which the Dark Lord know not. But LV > knows/knew about the power of love. He may have forgotten about it > or discounted it, but he knew about it. So then, how can that be the > power that he knows not? GEO: Because according to Rowling, Voldemort has never actually known love in the personal form and that is the key reason he is the way he is. He knows about love as a motivation, but he has never experienced it thus you could indeed say that it is something he knows not. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote: Or if it is, there must be > some aspect to it that we don't know of yet. JKR says we should be > asking ourselves: > > 1. Why did Harry survive? GEO: The actual two questions were why did Voldemort survive and why didn't Dumbledore try and kill Voldemort at the Ministry of Magic. We already know Harry survived the first time because of the shield of maternal protection that protected Harry from the killing curse and allowed the curse to rebound back and deprive Voldemort of a body. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Wed Apr 27 13:20:44 2005 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:20:44 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: <426ECCA8.00000C.03604@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > > I'm relatively new here so be patient with me. > > I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting > her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering > if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. If they are aware of the goings > on, they sure don't seem too concerned about the possibility of > losing their only child. > In OOP, Chap. 9, when Hermione learns that she has selected to be prefect she asks: Erm - Harry - could I borrow Hedwig so I can tell Mum and Dad? They'll be really pleased - I mean *prefect* is something they can understand.' This passage implies to me that to some extent, Hermione's parents keep themselves willfully ignorant about the WW, that Hermione has tried to talk to them about Hogwarts (though probably not the deadlier episodes) only to be met with varying levels of incomprehension. (see Mordicus Egg's classic text, "The Philosophy of the Mundane: Why Muggles Prefer Not to Know.") When Hermione became prefect though, that was one of the few things Hermione felt her parents could relate to. (Although they are sufficiently attuned in the ways of magic that Hermione is comfortable communicating with them via owl). Also, remember that in their sole appearance "on-stage" (in CoS, Chap. 4), the Drs. Granger are described as "nervous" when first seen in Diagon Alley, and they exit "shaking with fright" (having witnessed Arthur's brawl with Lucius). Given Hermione's headstrong nature, they must certainly realize that they could never keep her away from the WW. That may explain in part their studied neglect of the particulars of Hermione's academic career. - CMC From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Apr 27 13:29:51 2005 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:29:51 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128131 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > Seems like Harry either possessed the power at that time or he > didn't. Even if he did, that doesn't mean that LV knew of that > power then, or knows of it now. If Harry didn't possess the > power, couldn't he gain the power at a later point? If the series > makes anything clear, it is that the power of a wizard > grows/changes over time. > > It just seems that JKR wants us to assume that Harry's power to > love and feel love is that power of which the Dark Lord know not. > But LV knows/knew about the power of love. He may have forgotten > about it or discounted it, but he knew about it. So then, how can > that be the power that he knows not? Jen: On the night of GH, there was also the power of ancient magic which LV does know, but 'underestimated--to his cost'. Knowing of a thing and truly understanding its power are very different, I think. So Voldemort trusts neither love nor ancient magic to his detriment, and his plan backfired because he simply waved away the importance of these things. But, I do think Harry has another power. We're still waiting on the mystery of his eyes to be revealed. That's an issue we've heard about for five books with little or no explanation, so it must be something big. And are his eyes connected to his ability to do wandless magic? Even if they are though, we found out in the duel between Voldemort and Dumbledore that Harry's magical skills are not equal to Voldemort's. Even if he has a certain magical power Voldemort knows not, there's still the issue that he repelled Voldemort from possessing him out of his love for Sirius. Harry also has an ability to unite people against Voldemort, and call to him the people and objects he needs in the moment he is on the verge of being defeated by Voldemort. Call it luck, call it careful plotting by JKR ;), but it could also be a power he possesses, perhaps even connected to the mystery of his eyes. In moments of desperation Harry finds what he needs, four times now. It may be other people or creatures coming to his aid, but still, it's uncanny. Jen, sorry if this posts twice. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Apr 27 13:39:38 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:39:38 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: <1268675904.20050426235025@vcem.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128132 Donna asked: >>> I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. If they are aware of the goings on, they sure don't seem too concerned about the possibility of losing their only child. As a parent, I'm pretty dumbfounded.<<< Lea replied: >>I'm pretty sure Hermione's parents are completely in the dark about all the danger Hermione has been in. The fight at the DoM was during school, as has been all the other incidents.<< Susanne added: > I've always wondered if the school doesn't have to inform > the parents if their child gets hurt. > It seems like something they'd have to do, but looking at > canon, they don't appear to. > After all, just looking at Hermione, there have been several > instances that landed her in the infirmary ( twice in CoS, > and then DoM in OotP), and we never hear about her parents > coming to check on her. SSSusan: I wonder how much of this is the oft-cited British boarding school literature tradition at work? We've had many discussions here at HPfGU about how, in that tradition, as shocking as it may be to many 21st centurians -- especially us Americans -- that parents expect their 11-year-olds to be pretty much "formed" and mature and capable of taking care of themselves. There is still room for individual differences with students, though, as we know that Seamus' mother had real reservations about allowing Seamus to come back to Hogwarts after Cedric's death and the things she'd read about Harry. That could be that it's easier for her to be informed of the goings on because she *is* in the WW and has access to The Daily Prophet, the Quibbler, Witch Weekly, etc. It appears that Hermione didn't set the Grangers up with subscriptions to those. So unless DD is inclined to report the goings on, the dangers, and the escapades the Trio have been involved in, or unless Hermione herself is so inclined, it's easy to imagine that the Grangers really are in the dark. So I guess for me it's a combination of the WW being a pretty rough place where people are expected to be resilient, the lack of information coming to the Grangers by choice and/or by virtue of their being Muggles, and perhaps the "buck up ? you're a young adult now" attitude of the British boarding school. Just my two knuts. YMMV. Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Apr 27 13:53:02 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:53:02 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128133 Phoenix: > > > I don't think there is much for Harry to learn from Snape except > > > how not to live his life. Snape isn't a war hero like Mazer, > > > he's a nearly worthless war criminal who shouldn't be allowed > > > near children for any reason. Alla: > > I actually think that there are A LOT of things Harry can learn > > from Snape. ( Hey, Susan, help me out here, if you are reading > > this post, will you? :-)) Phoenixgod: > I'm sure there plenty of things that Snape knows Harry would find > useful, but nothing that someone else could teach Harry more > effectively or more enjoyably. SSSusan: Hmmm. I attempted to address this in 128112. I'm not sure how this could be true, Phoenixgod, for the things Alla & I were contemplating. It's true that DD could teach Harry Occlumency. But who else could teach Harry about especially useful potions and antidotes? Who else has the INSIDE scoop on what it's like to be a DE? On how Voldy operates from having *watched* him? On what his strengths & weaknesses might be? Lucius Malfoy, Dolohov, Karkaroff, Avery, MacNair and all those other DEs hardly seem likely to be inclined to share their knowledge. Snape, former DE and current Order member, presumably would have this knowledge and be willing to share it for the cause. Now, I agree with you about how (un)enjoyable it would be for Harry to learn these things from Snape ;-) but I disagree that there are others who COULD teach Harry all of the things Snape *could* (if he were willing & able!) teach him. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Apr 27 15:17:14 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 15:17:14 -0000 Subject: Snape's Purpose (was Re: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128134 > Phoenix: > I don't think there is much for Harry to learn from Snape except how not to live his life. Snape isn't a war hero like Mazer, he's a > nearly worthless war criminal who shouldn't be allowed near children for any reason. Potioncat: I disagree. But first I have to say I know nothing about Ender's Game, so I can't compare the two. Is Snape here to "teach Harry" something? His role may be protector, advisor, spy, accuser, teacher...any or all. But JKR has given him some purpose if only to be a constant irritant. "Snape isn't a war hero...he's a nearly worthless war criminal..." Well, no he isn't a war hero. War heroes have performed some act of bravery above and beyond what was expected and were recognised for it. So, maybe one day he will be seen as a war hero. Or not. But he isn't a war criminal either. After a war the winnning side determines if any of the enemy commited crimes, and then accuses and punishes. Not every member of the Nazi Forces were charged as criminals. Same with the Confederate Forces. It's not clear from the books if mere membership with the Death Eaters makes a person a criminal. Nor do we know what Snape's participation was before he turned to DD. But he didn't simply provide information for leniency. He came back when LV was still strong then risked his life (and continues to do so) to help DD. > Alla: > > I think we should team up and join the prosecution in Snape's trial > on Accio. :-) Potioncat: I'd like to see how that turns out! I hope he has a darned good defense attorney. He'll need one! Alla: The problem, as I see it, is that Snape is either > uncapable or unwilling or both to teach Harry that. > > If nothing else, Snape indeed has a knowledge of Dark Side, which > Harry may need to defeat Voldie and Co, IMO. Potioncat: Well, to a certain extent, Snape is the best there is. Here's a man who is loyal to DD who was once part of LV's organization. He appears to be a powerful wizard himself (open to debate, I know) He has some rare gifts and inside knowledge. He seems determined to protect Harry. He's one heck of a jerk, and a terrible teacher. He appears to have taken on this role out of obligation/duty rather than because he wants it. Snape seems to be willing to go against his natural inclinations for the good of the Order. (At least he tried, I think.) (Appears to, seems to...very nurse-like charting here.) Potioncat From WNCMegs at aol.com Wed Apr 27 13:42:42 2005 From: WNCMegs at aol.com (Megan) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 13:42:42 -0000 Subject: The boys holding the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128135 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" wrote: > > Born and will be born. > We see two people holding the prophecy: Neville and Harry. Both hold > the prophecy at the DoM. We as readers assume that it is only those > whom the prophecy is about who can take it off the shelf based on info > attained through one of the DE's. But what if more accurately, only > people whom the prophecy is about can hold onto the prophecy? > > No one else touches the prophecy, as far as I can remember. Since I'm > at work for the next 12.5 hours, can someone check canon on this pretty > please? Thanks. Megan Writes: If I remember correctly, I thought the reason why no one else could not pick up the prophecy is because their name was not on it. The only people who can pick up their prophecies from the DoM are those with their names on it. Obviously, LV could not pick it up, as Bellatrix stated, since he was wanted by the DoM even though they were "sweetly ignoring his return." If I remember correctly, also, DD said that Harry's name was added to the prophacy AFTER the attack at GH. That is one reason why the (?) was beside his name. The DoM was not SURE if this is what the prophacy meant but since LV chose to "mark" Harry, he is the obvious person the prophacy is talking about. *gone back to lurking and getting ready for finals. Too bad mine do not include wands or spells* :-D From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 16:07:01 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:07:01 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128136 Angie wrote: > > If this has been asked, pleas forgive me. I do not know how to > search all of the threads. Eustace_Scrubb: No need to ask for forgiveness on this. Searching all of the threads (or even all threads since the HBP covers were released) is a task too daunting for even Tri-Wizard champions. Angie: > Is anyone else curious as to whose pensieve Harry and DD are > looking at on the cover of HBP? I've been hoping that JKR will > eventually give Harry his own pensieve, because it seems to me the > only two people who really know what happened "that fateful night" > would be Harry and Voldemort (unless someone else was present, of > course). Eustace_Scrubb: Well, I suppose that since DD is looking at the pensieve (or is it the Pillar of Storge?) with Harry that it's Dumbledore's. I have wondered whether there is only one pensieve in the Wizarding World. Harry at least believes the one in Snape's office is the same one he'd seen in Dumbledore's office in GOF. But surely there are others who need to empty some thoughts from their minds from time to time, either to clear the mind or to examine some thoughts more carefully in the pensieve. I've thought Nicolas and Perenelle Flamel would have found such a device most useful, given that they had over 6 centuries of thoughts and memories to deal with. They might have needed several! Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 10:14:47 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 03:14:47 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Peter Pettigrew (was Re: Nel Question # 6. ) In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050427101447.56210.qmail@web30709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128137 Finwitch: > Yes, well... Remember it was Percy bringing the rat > in... Possibly > just after getting his Hogwarts letter, asking if he > could take it for > a pet... why would Molly say no? It's not like a pet > of that sort > costs anything, and the poor dear had lost a > finger... Bookworm: > Except that in the Shrieking Shack someone points > out that Scabbers > had been with the Weasleys for 12 years. Percy was > had just finished > school the previous year, so he would have gotten > his letter only 8 > years earlier. (Ron told Harry during the first > trip on the Hogwarts > Express that Scabbers was "Percy's old rat".) > > Hopefully we will find out just how Scabbers came to > live with the > Weasleys. Laurie: For me what makes the most sense is that Wormtail most likely moved in after wandering for a while and (probably) didn't know whom he moved in with till later. That said it was probably an added bonus when Harry became friends with Ron. laurie From dk59us at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 16:16:24 2005 From: dk59us at yahoo.com (Eustace_Scrubb) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:16:24 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128138 Bonnie: > > JKR says we should be asking ourselves: > > > > 1. Why did Harry survive? Valky: > The clue trail... > 1. The AK was aimed at Baby Harry's head and left a big scar that > now connects Harry to Voldemort like they were one person. > > 2. LV sees 'himself' in Harry!! (ie the reason he went after Harry > instead of Neville, in COS Tom says he sees likeness etc) > > 3. Baby Harry looks up at someone who sees himself in Harry with his > special ability to see things that others can't. > > Conclusion --- Baby Harry sees a man looking into a mirror!!! > > Hence LV casts the AK on himself. > > I should um... stop there... right? Now, Eustace_Scrubb: Erm, no, don't stop _quite_ there. As GEO pointed out in another post, the question JKR says we should ask is "Why did Voldemort survive?" not "Why did Harry survive?" And your conclusion, "LV casts the AK on himself," I would guess is why JKR is telling us to ask why LV survived that encounter. If an AK rebounded on him, why didn't he die? Cheers, Eustace_Scrubb From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 17:47:30 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:47:30 -0000 Subject: What only Snape can teach Harry. Was:Re: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128139 SSSusan: Hmmm. I attempted to address this in 128112. I'm not sure how this could be true, Phoenixgod, for the things Alla & I were contemplating. It's true that DD could teach Harry Occlumency. But who else could teach Harry about especially useful potions and antidotes? Who else has the INSIDE scoop on what it's like to be a DE? On how Voldy operates from having *watched* him? On what his strengths & weaknesses might be? Lucius Malfoy, Dolohov, Karkaroff, Avery, MacNair and all those other DEs hardly seem likely to be inclined to share their knowledge. Snape, former DE and current Order member, presumably would have this knowledge and be willing to share it for the cause. Alla: I think I would concentrate on Snape's knowledge of Dark side as something only he can teach Harry, because as to his knowledge of Potions, well Dumbledore CAN hire another Potion master, right? If push comes to shove at least. :-) Speculative, I know, but I seriously doubt that Dumbledore can hire another former DE to teach Harry about how Voldie and Co operate. :-). Oh, wait, he already did hired a DE in the past. :-) Who knows, maybe in exchange for lenient sentencing any of those you named will be willing to provide private tutoring for Harry. :-) Here is another thought I just had. Some posters suspect that Harry will defeat Voldemort by non-violent or maybe not strictly violent means, correct? Maybe Dumbledore thinks so too and thinks that Harry does not NEED the knowledge of how Dark side operate in order not to become corrupted by Dark side. Ooops, now I think I am getting "Star wars" vibes, something that JKR said won't happen. :-) But yes, I think Snape possesses SOME knowledge Harry needs, now if only the acceptable way to pass this knowledge could have been worked out for the benefit of all parties. :-) Just my speculative opinion of course, Alla From willsonkmom at msn.com Wed Apr 27 18:36:05 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 18:36:05 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128140 > Angie: > > Is anyone else curious as to whose pensieve Harry and DD are > > looking at on the cover of HBP? > Eustace_Scrubb: > I have wondered whether there is only one pensieve in the Wizarding > World. Harry at least believes the one in Snape's office is the same one he'd seen in Dumbledore's office in GOF. Potioncat: More important than whose pensieve is it, IMO, is whose memories are in it? Harry's Dumbledores? I wouldn't think they'd be looking into someone else's memories....uh, oh...Merlin help them if it's Snape's thoughts!! The other question is, does the green light have any meaning to the story? If, a big IF, the artist read the book and knows there's a scene that involves a green light, then the light is a clue to us. But if an artist just chose green for some random reason, it isn't a clue at all. And as much fun as it is to try to guess what might be, I still haven't figured out the jacket of the US OoP. Potioncat From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 19:27:19 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:27:19 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128143 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eustace_Scrubb" wrote: > Now, Eustace_Scrubb: > Erm, no, don't stop _quite_ there. > > As GEO pointed out in another post, the question JKR says we should > ask is "Why did Voldemort survive?" not "Why did Harry survive?" > > And your conclusion, "LV casts the AK on himself," I would guess is > why JKR is telling us to ask why LV survived that encounter. If an AK > rebounded on him, why didn't he die? phoenixgod2000: If you continue the logic chain then perhaps an AK didn't rebound onto him. Maybe Harry's power transmuted the spell so that it wasn't the same when it reflected back. And if Harry can somehow change a spell that is perhaps the most unavoidable curse in existence who knows what other magic Harry might transmute. What if he can unravel the immortality spells that hold Voldemort together. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 19:46:16 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (Carol Thoma) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:46:16 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050427194616.6812.qmail@web14323.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128144 --- Ali wrote: > Accio is also delighted to invite all its delegates > to participate in its show trial of Severus Snape. The trial will take place with the Potions Master in absentia. He will be tried on the following 4 counts (a Ron style explanation is provided on our > website) > > 1. That the accused did, feloniously, treasonously > and with malice aforethought, combine with others to support the most bloody, abhominable and beastly cause of the notorious, prescribed and avowed traitor Thomas Marvolo Riddle, sometime called Lord Voldemort; > > 2. That the accused did, feloniously, treasonously > and with malice aforethought, voluntarily accept membership within a prescribed and illegal organisation, vulgarly termed "the Death Eaters"; > > 3. That the accused, feloniously, treasonously and > with malice aforethought, continues as a member in said illegal organisation > > 4. That the accused has on divers occasions and > under the guise of lawful chastisement committed assault and battery on minors in respect of whom he was in loco parentis, such assault and battery being occasioned by divers magical and physical means, and resulting in perceptible physical and psychological harm to the said minors. Carol responds: Shouldn't that be "proscribed," not "prescribed," in item 2? BTW, sounds like a rigged trial, with the verdict determined in advance. If Snape doesn't get off on items 3 and 4, it's definitely a kangaroo court. (Sounds like an accurate reflection of the corrupt justice system in the WW.) I'll check out the site, but it sounds as if pro-Snape or neutral/objective input is a waste of time. Carol, who sometimes copyedits for Prometheus Books but unfortunately wasn't assigned the Kern book (assuming that he doesn't share the anti-Snape viewpoint so evident in the so-called trial) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Apr 27 19:57:30 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 19:57:30 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128145 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: SSSusan: > I wonder how much of this is the oft-cited British boarding school > literature tradition at work? We've had many discussions here at > HPfGU about how, in that tradition, as shocking as it may be to many > 21st centurians -- especially us Americans -- that parents expect > their 11-year-olds to be pretty much "formed" and mature and capable > of taking care of themselves. > So I guess for me it's a combination of the WW being a pretty rough > place where people are expected to be resilient, the lack of > information coming to the Grangers by choice and/or by virtue of > their being Muggles, and perhaps the "buck up ? you're a young > adult now" attitude of the British boarding school. Geoff: It's not only the tradition of the boarding school, it's partly the British "boys don't cry syndrome". It may have lessened now but I can remember as an 11 year-old going as a First Year to a grammar school where there were various "initiations" which we were supposed to undergo without complaint and, in fact, many things which happened didn't reach my parents' ears because I would probably have considered myself a wimp for so doing. For my first three weeks or so in the school, I was picked on by a Third Year who took every opoprtunity to push me around if we met in the corridors (which only happened if I didn't see him first!). He went on to be a champion boxer..... I kept mum on this and just stoically put up with it. As a teacher I can recall many times trying to sort out problems - usually with boys - when lips were sealed and information was not obtainable. I think it is partly this that we see in Harry's dealings with Umbridge over detention. He was /not/ going to be seen to be telling tales (to McGonagall or some one similar) and he was damned if he would let her see that she was getting through to him. Stiff upper lip practice! From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 20:09:55 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 20:09:55 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128146 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "phoenixgod2000" wrote: > phoenixgod2000: If you continue the logic chain then perhaps an AK > didn't rebound onto him. Edinburgh Book Festival JKR: Not, "Why did Harry live?" but, "Why didn't Voldemort die?" The killing curse rebounded, so he should have died. Why didn't he? At the end of Goblet of Fire he says that one or more of the steps that he took enabled him to survive. You should be wondering what he did to make sure that he did not die?I will put it that way. I don't think that it is guessable. It may be?someone could guess it?but you should be asking yourself that question, particularly now that you know about the prophesy. I'd better stop there or I will really incriminate myself. http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 I think the words of the writer herself namely JK Rowling are pretty final on the issue. The killing curse rebounded on him and he survived not because of Harry, but because of his own dark experiments. > What if he can unravel the immortality spells that hold Voldemort > together. GEO: I reckon that would be the gleam of triumph seen on Dumbledore's face in the end of GoF and also probably tie into the second question of why Dumbledore didn't bother with killing Voldemort in the Ministry of Magic. From Lynx412 at AOL.com Wed Apr 27 20:30:00 2005 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:30:00 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? Message-ID: <9.42ef418d.2fa15048@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128147 In a message dated 4/27/2005 2:43:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, willsonkmom at msn.com writes: > Potioncat: > More important than whose pensieve is it, IMO, is whose memories are > in it? Harry's Dumbledores? I wouldn't think they'd be looking into > someone else's memories....uh, oh...Merlin help them if it's Snape's > thoughts!! > > The other question is, does the green light have any meaning to the > story? If, a big IF, the artist read the book and knows there's a > scene that involves a green light, then the light is a clue to us. > But if an artist just chose green for some random reason, it isn't a > clue at all. And as much fun as it is to try to guess what might be, > I still haven't figured out the jacket of the US OoP. Green light. Interesting. Perhaps they are looking at Harry's memories of the AK at GH. Perhaps the Pensieve and HBP contain the answer to JKR's "Why did Voldemort survive?" question. What would happen to someone who wandered into the path of an AK inside someone else's memory? The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 20:34:13 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 20:34:13 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: <20050427194616.6812.qmail@web14323.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128148 Ali: 3. That the accused, feloniously, treasonously and with malice aforethought, continues as a member in said illegal organisation 4. That the accused has on divers occasions and under the guise of lawful chastisement committed assault and battery on minors in respect of whom he was in loco parentis, such assault and battery being occasioned by divers magical and physical means, and resulting in perceptible physical and psychological harm to the said minors. Carol responds: BTW, sounds like a rigged trial, with the verdict determined in advance. If Snape doesn't get off on items 3 and 4, it's definitely a kangaroo court.(Sounds like an accurate reflection of the corrupt justice system in the WW.) I'll check out the site, but it sounds as if pro-Snape or neutral/objective input is a waste of time. Alla: Ummm, I am pretty sure that this is all in good fun, not the reflection of any corrupt justice systems, in my opinion of course. :- But really, I think item number 4 is the strongest item in the indictment and I really hope he does NOT get off on this one, really. :-) If I were the prosecutor, I would call Neville as my star witness. :- :-) Item number three... well, if it indeed will not be proved moot in HBP,as others speculated, it will all depends on how skilled the lawyers on both sides will be and I do think that very skilled debaters will sign up. Sigh... I seriously want to be there, but so far I don't think I will be in any luck. Carol, who sometimes copyedits for Prometheus Books but unfortunately wasn't assigned the Kern book (assuming that he doesn't share the anti-Snape viewpoint so evident in the so-called trial) Alla, who thinks that Kern book is one of the best Potter's critique out there and who had not noticed ANY specific bias in it. Just my opinion of course, Alla. From elanorpam at yahoo.com.br Wed Apr 27 20:43:16 2005 From: elanorpam at yahoo.com.br (Paula "Elanor Pam") Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:43:16 -0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Where is Penelope Clearwater? (was Percy Weasley etc.) References: Message-ID: <00a701c54b69$bfa7ed70$0601010a@harrypotter> No: HPFGUIDX 128149 From: "Janet Anderson" > >(Elanor Pam) If Penny has just mysteriously dropped off > >the face of the earth, then something smells fishy. (snip) > (janet anderson)I don't, however, think she's being held hostage for Percy's good behavior > as a spy. If Voldemort wanted Percy as a spy, the last thing he'd do would > be to have him break off with his family, thereby insuring that he would get > no useful information. I don't think that, in the case I exposed in my previous message, she'd be used as a hostage either. I do think, however, that her whereabouts are unknown to Percy, but that he _thinks_ he has a clue. If not, I doubt he'd keep it from his family. That's why I don't believe he's spying for EITHER side, or that either side so much as think he's involved in any of this. He's a taboo in the Weasley family, and I don't think Voldemort knows his name any better than Crouch did. I'm not sure if I was clear in my previous message - I think he's acting as a 3rd party, and completely on his own. NOT as a spy to either side. Elanor Pam From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 21:17:46 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:17:46 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128150 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > More important than whose pensieve is it, IMO, is whose memories are in it? Harry's Dumbledores? I wouldn't think they'd be looking into someone else's memories....uh, oh...Merlin help them if it's Snape's thoughts!! > snip)If, a big IF, the artist read the book and knows there's a scene that involves a green light, then the light is a clue to us. But if an artist just chose green for some random reason, it isn't a > clue at all. Tonks: First I think that there are different pensives, but not many. I think that the green light is about the AK at GH. The artist does put clues on the cover, but sometimes we don't get them until we read the book. Often the clues are about the ending or some event near the end of the book. I want to know what is on the back cover, but they will not give us that information. I almost want to look at the back cover before I even start to read it when I get it!! Can't wait.. turn off the phone, computer, TV. Bar the door, after letting the pizza man in for a minute, of course. And no one sees me again till I come staggering out all blurry eyed on Monday.. or earlier. ;- ) Tonks_op From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 21:36:30 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:36:30 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128151 >>Betsy: >Hermione Granger = Peter Wiggin< >>Phoenixgod: >I would say that the character most like Peter Wiggins is Tom Riddle himself. The whole hiding of his identity, animal torture thing, tremendous gifts misspent, and well liked political philosophy screams Peter to me.< >>Angela: >Peter? Really? I agree both Peter and Hermione have enough intelligence and political savvy to undermine tyrannical powerheads, but that's where I see the similarities ending. As you point out, Hermione may not be winning any popurlarity contests with her over- the-top desire to be right and to do right... >If anything, I'd compare Peter to Voldemort. Both are adept at drawing people to their cause through charisma and/or manipulation...< Betsy: I don't want to get into a huge discussion about Peter Wiggin (not the place, obviously) -- but here's my view on Voldemort. Voldemort is evil, a true sociopath of Hitchcock-ian levels. If Voldemort gets his way he will destroy not only the muggle world but the Wizarding World as well. (I suspect that old Voldie was none too pleased with his mother, either. How could he hold her in anything but contempt? A witch of her bloodlines consorting with a muggle, and getting herself in such a bad state of dependence on that muggle she dies when he deserts her. No, I'm quite sure Voldemore would be well pleased to see the WW burn.) Peter, for all his many faults, saves his world from a bloody war and leaves it in a state of strong, healthy stability (all from Ender's Game). Also, Voldemort's followers have an unhealthy... I'll say loyalty, because love don't come in it, for the man. Bellatrix is a prime example, but take a look at Peter Pettigrew too. That scene in the graveyard in GoF, after Pettigrew has already CHOPPED OFF HIS OWN HAND(!!!) for the man was creepy to begin with. Then there's the added bonus of Voldemort telling Pettigrew to hold up his arm, and Pettigrew's all thankful for the expected healing, and Voldemort's all, "No, you chump, your *other* arm." And everyone, including Pettigrew, thinks he's planning on cutting off the other hand, and Pettigrew, LIFTS HIS ARM UP ANYWAY (!!??!!), and if that don't drive home the intensity in Voldemort's followers, I don't know what would. Peter Wiggin don't come close. Not in Ender's Game, and certainly not in the Shadow series (for want of a better name). Hermione, on the other hand.... Of course I don't think the girl is bent on world domination (though she does seem quite interested in making over the current WW). But she has a definite streak of ruthlessness none of the other Hogwarts students have shown to possess. It was first displayed in PS/SS when she left Neville in a *full* body bind, lying on the Gryffindor common room floor, while a dark wizard roamed the halls (not even Draco went that far), and also reared it's head during OotP when she lead Umbridge to the Centaurs. Hermione is not stupid. Part of her *had* to know she was putting Umbridge's life on the line. One could also argue that her trick with the House Elves in OotP, hiding clothing about the room, speaks to a certain ruthless disregard of other beings' thoughts and desires. (Valentine would *never* show such a lack of empathy.) No, Hermione isn't nearly the shade of gray Peter Wiggin is, but she ain't no shining beacon of white either. >>Angela: >Ron could also be compared to Alai, if only because Alai was Ender's first friend, Ron was Harry's first friend.< Betsy: Alai could also link to Luna Lovegood - gives the hero an extra special, one could argue spiritual boost when the hero is at his lowest. >>Phoenixgod: >Honestly, if DD showed as much angst about what he does to Harry as Graff does for Ender, I would like him more.< Betsy: I think that while Graff's angst comes through in his weight gain and his self-deprecating humor, Dumbledore's comes through in his unwillingness to pull Harry into the war. Of course, Graff has been in the position of turning highly gifted children into weapons for years before Ender comes on the scene. Dumbledore is brand new to the position. I think the lack of experience comes out. Honestly, I think Dumbledore has a harder time of it. He's the only one, really, who knows Harry's importance to the war effort. He's faced with some highly difficult decisions he has to make in a tiny amount of time if he's to prevent doom from raining down, and he's been *forced* into the position of training Harry to take down a wizard Dumbledore probably feels he should face himself. Graff, on the other hand, had a philosophy and methodology already in place, and a support staff. No contest really, in my mind. >>Phoenixgod: >I also agree that DD isn't quite as ruthless as he needs to be in order to get Harry up to snuff. >Graff is as tough as I think DD should have been. And I think Harry would appreciate his honestly and not being treated as quite the child like he is by DD and the Order.< Betsy: It lends a certain strength to the argument that maybe a weapon would prefer to be treated like a weapon. (Of course Ender has a nervous breakdown mid-novel so there's that.) Seriously, I think that was Dumbledore's big mistake -- the one he fully admits to. He cannot see past the child Harry to see the strong wizard within. (Maybe Snape is one of the few who actually do? I admit, I threw that in to raise ire. I'm that kind of bad. ) I fully expect things to change in HBP (an expectation boosted by various covers) and Dumbledore to start treating Harry like the strong wizard Harry can be. >>Betsy: >Professor Snape = Mazer Rackham< >>Phoenixgod: >The only thing Snape and Rackham have in common is that Snape should be shot into a wide elipical orbit around earth too.< Betsy: But where would that leave the Order? Snape is one of its strongest members. >>Phoenixgod: Snape isn't a war hero like Mazer, he's a nearly worthless war criminal who shouldn't be allowed near children for any reason.< Betsy: Ah. I see our differences over Snape are near insurmountable. (I could say I was surprised but... ) I actually think Snape *is* a war-hero (not a celebrated one because - spy) and a good teacher. I think he's one of Dumbledore's, and therefore the Order's, staunchest allies, and if Snape was taken out the Order would suffer a severe blow. All my opinion of course. >>Phoenixgod: >I think the person most closely resembling Rackham in the novels is Mad-Eye Moody, Fake!Moody to be exact. He has the same harsh, uncomprosing teaching style that Mazer has and knows the enemy in the same way. And when he wasn't trying to kill Harry, he was one of his best teachers. just like Mazer.< Betsy: Except of course Fake!Moody was *not* trying to help Harry win. And he didn't share any of his knowledge of the enemy with anyone (until drugged). And I wouldn't call his teaching style uncompromising. He was as gentle as Lupin in many ways. And of course he reached a level of teacher to student cruelty not matched until Umbridge pulled out her blood quill. And rather than leaving Harry in a position of strength and stability, Fake!Moody was probably directly responsible for some of Harry's paranoia and capslock-ing in OotP. Fake!Moody was cool like a child molester is fun: the fact that the kids loved him was all part of his sick trap. >>Betsy: >Neville Longbottom = Bean< >>Angela: >Agreed, to a certain extent. It's true that both are runners-up to the chosen one (Ender and Harry). But Bean was an intellectual equal to Ender, something Ender may or may not have realized. I don't see Neville, at this point, being at the same level talent-wise as Harry. However, as Betsy points out, this may change in future books.< >>Phoenixgod: >I agree with you totally, except for I hope that the victory against Voldemort is more solely Harry's.< Betsy: Just going by Ender's Game alone, I think Bean provided more background and moral support than anything else, especially with his, "the enemy's gate is *down*" cry at the final battle. Just as Neville, merely by sticking by Harry's side and refusing to back down in the battle at the DoM helped keep Harry going, I think. I don't think Neville will steal any of Harry's thunder (something I didn't honestly see the Shadow books doing with Ender, myself) but I think he may provide that extra bit of support, even if it's just in the form of a rallying cry. (And don't you think Harry needs a special rallying cry of his own? This - if nothing else - screams out for a redeemed Draco ) Betsy, who thinks Ender's Game is a classic piece of literature that should be on everyone's bookshelf, and that the Shadow series is a fun and exciting read that pales in comparison to the original, but is well worth the read, if only for Bean. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 21:49:58 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:49:58 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley - "of his own accord" might mean "neither for dumbly, nor for voldie" In-Reply-To: <013401c54ac7$52d05720$0601010a@harrypotter> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128152 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Paula \"Elanor Pam\"" wrote: > > The best answer is that the position he attains now has a few advantages - like access to restricted information. He seems to be a scribe, since in the occasions we've met him in OOTP he's always been holding parchment and quills. Also, I don't think the minister's junior undersecretary (is that it?) would be barred from > checking information or researching anything, maybe except what pertains to the Department of Mysteries (we don't know if the Minister himself has any say over their researches). So let's suppose he's humiliating himself in the name of knowledge. What kind of knowledge? > > And now I have another question. Where has Penny been all this time? > > Nothing was mentioned of him and Penelope breaking up, or of her travelling > anywhere - Tonks: Hummmm... Percy is a scribe... and his girlfriend is Penelope??? Are you listening fellow detectives? Do you know that the only person that can look at the ancient book that tells you how to make the SS other than a Jewish priest is a SCRIBE?? And Flamel's wife's name was close to Penelope. Parnella or something like that. Ok folks... do you think Percy is looking for something? Maybe like an *old book*... like the one on the cover of the HBP book?? Hummmm???? Tonks_op From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 21:58:57 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:58:57 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128153 >>Ali: >3. That the accused, feloniously, treasonously and with malice aforethought, continues as a member in said illegal organisation >4. That the accused has on divers occasions and under the guise of lawful chastisement committed assault and battery on minors in respect of whom he was in loco parentis, such assault and battery being occasioned by divers magical and physical means, and resulting in perceptible physical and psychological harm to the said minors.< >>Carol: >BTW, sounds like a rigged trial, with the verdict determined in advance. If Snape doesn't get off on items 3 and 4, it's definitely a kangaroo court. (Sounds like an accurate reflection of the corrupt justice system in the WW.)< Betsy: Amen, sister! While number 3 could (and has) been argued by those who believe in ESE!Snape, number 4 is just plain silly. "Assult and battery"? What? "Perceptible physical and psychological harm"? Huh? >>Alla: >But really, I think item number 4 is the strongest item in the indictment and I really hope he does NOT get off on this one, really. :-) >If I were the prosecutor, I would call Neville as my star witness.< Betsy: Urg. Really? I honestly don't think Neville is that big of a wimp. So Snape's a bit short with him, big friggin deal. Does he have a scar permently etched into his hand? Has Neville ever left an encounter with Snape bruised and bloody? Has Snape ever colluded with Neville's enemies in order to *kill* him? Okay, sure, at one point in time Snape was the form of Neville's boggart - when the boy was THIRTEEN YEARS OLD!! I'm sure Neville has gotten over it by now. If not, then Neville was never really fit to leave home in the first place. It's a big scary world out there. If a strict, no- nonense teacher is enough to send Neville cowering under his bed, he should stay home with his grandma. (Okay, so I was a bit harsh there, but "assult and battery"??!? I mean, honestly.) Betsy, who hopes no feeling were hurt during the reading of this semi-emotional response - it's all in good fun folks! From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 22:06:37 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:06:37 -0000 Subject: End of book seven - what happens? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128154 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen Barker" wrote: > > Gary V wrote: > > > 2. Dumbledore said the room in the Dept. of Mysteries was full > > of the very essence of what Harry has in abudance > > Karen: > > At 'the end' Harry is going to get Lord V into that room somehow. > He's either going to lure him, trick him, magic him or physically > force him into that room. It is full of the very essence of what > Harry has in abundance so Harry will be unharmed, but Lord V cannot > stand to be near it so he explodes / implodes / vapourises totally > finally and irreperably. > > Karen sits back with a smile, convinced that she's got it, then > ducks her head slightly in anticipation of the arguments proving her > not only completely wrong, but also slightly batty!! > > Karen bboyminn: Actually not such a bad idea. I'd say it's right up there with the suggested 'Throught the Veil' endings. But it also presents the same problems as the 'thought the Veil' endings, and that is, logically, how can we get everyone into the Dept of Mysteries of all places, for the 'Through the Door' or 'Through the Veil' ending to occur. Harry has already been lured there once under false pretences, not likely he will allow that to happen again. If Voldie kidnapped someone to lure Harry, why on earth, of all places, would he hold them in the Ministry of Magic? I don't know about the Implosion/Explosion thing, but based on Dumbledore 'other ways to destroy a man' statement, I do agree that time behind The Door would certainly destroy Voldie. As to Number 1.) of Gary V's original post- "1. One of them is going to be murdered, one is going to be the murderer. (Voldemort & Harry)" This is what Dumbledore assumes, this is what Harry assumes, and by extension, this is what WE all assume, but murder is not necessarily true. 'Killing each other' is based on /interpretation/ of the Prophecy and the nature of Voldemort, but again, Dumbledore's 'other ways to destroy a man' statement might be pointing us away from that conclusion. I'm in agreement with a lot of people, I could handle Harry somehow causing Voldemort's death, but I really hate the idea of our 'pure in nature' hero flat-out point-blank bang-you're-dead killing the Dark Lord. I would much prefer that he found a way to destory him without killing him. If he does kill him, I would prefer that it was /indirect/. Although highly unlikely, once such scenario would be for Harry to somehow cause Voldemort to lose all his magic powers. This would be fate worse than death. Voldemort with his many protections against death would be force to live out his long long miserably long long life as a powerless helpless muggle. Now that is certaily a fate worse than death for someone like Voldemort. Another, is for Harry in a self-sacrificial act to pull Voldemort throught The Veil. That, in my opinion would be Harry causing Voldemort's death without actually murdering him, and would also be a very heroic act. So, while everyone inside and outside the books assumes that death, or worse yet, murder is the logical conclusion, I really hope JKR can come up with a more heroic and interesting twist than that. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 22:21:27 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:21:27 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128155 Alla: But really, I think item number 4 is the strongest item in the indictment and I really hope he does NOT get off on this one, really. :-) If I were the prosecutor, I would call Neville as my star witness.< Betsy: Urg. Really? I honestly don't think Neville is that big of a wimp. So Snape's a bit short with him, big friggin deal. Does he have a scar permently etched into his hand? Has Neville ever left an encounter with Snape bruised and bloody? Has Snape ever colluded with Neville's enemies in order to *kill* him? Okay, sure, at one point in time Snape was the form of Neville's boggart - when the boy was THIRTEEN YEARS OLD!! I'm sure Neville has gotten over it by now. If not, then Neville was never really fit to leave home in the first place. It's a big scary world out there. If a strict, no- nonense teacher is enough to send Neville cowering under his bed, he should stay home with his grandma. (Okay, so I was a bit harsh there, but "assult and battery"??!? I mean, honestly.) Alla: Guilty, Betsy, you know he is. :-) On Items 1, 2 and 4 for sure and 3 - well, lets' wait and see. I will leave to others to defend the Neville, because really "strict and no- nonsense teacher" are SO not the words I would describe Snape, I just want to ask one thing. How do you know that Snape is not Neville's biggest fear anymore? By the way, who said that Neville is going to be my only witness? Does throwing Harry out of his office rings any bells to you for example? Do I have to count how many times Snape stands over Neville or Harry in the classroom in the threatening manner? OK, probably those are not enough for criminal prosecution in RL, but will do quite well in this one, IMO. Here is the definition of assault fron on line dictionary. I am not sure if it goes word by word with my Black Law dictionary ( do NOT do criminal law), but I seem to remember from my criminal law classes that threat of force can be enough to establish assault. ASSAULT, crim. law. An assault is any unlawful attempt or offer with force or violence to do a corporal hurt to another, whether from malice or wantonness; for example, by striking at him or even holding up the fist at him in a threatening or insulting manner, or with other circumstances as denote at the time. an intention, coupled with a present ability, of actual violence against his person, as by pointing a weapon at him when he is within reach of it. 6 Rogers Rec: 9. When the injury is actually inflicted, it amounts to a battery. (q.v.) I especially love the part "or even holding up the fist at him in a threatening or insulting manner". Just my opinion of course, Alla From jferer at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 22:24:02 2005 From: jferer at yahoo.com (Jim Ferer) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:24:02 -0000 Subject: The boys holding the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128156 > Megan Writes: > > If I remember correctly, I thought the reason why no one else could > not pick up the prophecy is because their name was not on it. The > only people who can pick up their prophecies from the DoM are those > with their names on it. Obviously, LV could not pick it up, as Bellatrix > stated, since he was wanted by the DoM even though they were "sweetly > ignoring his return." If I remember correctly, also, DD said that > Harry's name was added to the prophacy AFTER the attack at GH. That > is one reason why the (?) was beside his name. The DoM was not SURE > if this is what the prophacy meant but since LV chose to "mark" Harry, > he is the obvious person the prophacy is talking about. > > *gone back to lurking and getting ready for finals. Too bad mine do > not include wands or spells* :-D By the time of the MoM caper, Voldemort knew that only the person(s) a Prophecy are about can *pick it up*; yet Lucius and all the Death Eaters are ready to handle it once Harry had lifted it off the shelf. It sure seems that the only restriction is on lifting the prophecy off its resting place. Once that's done, anybody can handle it. Jim F. From annamhudson at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 16:25:38 2005 From: annamhudson at yahoo.com (Anna) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 16:25:38 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128157 > Donna: > > If they are aware of the goings on, why didn't they > > pull their only child home? If they are aware of the goings > > on, they sure don't seem too concerned about the possibility > > of losing their only child. > Anna: If you read on JKR website, Hermione wasn't going to be an only child, however she said that she just didn't see the point of putting her sister in the books and changed her mind.... I am quoting on memory here...Hope that helps....and I think her parents don't have much contact throught the WW, and only through their daughter. Anna From annamhudson at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 17:24:28 2005 From: annamhudson at yahoo.com (Anna) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:24:28 -0000 Subject: Sir Headless Nick Half Blood Prince? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128158 Anna: I was just wondering if anyone thinks the HBP is Sir Headless Nick. I am listening to OotP and he just stated right after the Sorting of the 1st years that he has noble blood running though his veins. And then Ron laughed at him? Any thoughts, anyone? I am just wondering what others think. Sorry I can't reference it to the book, 'cause my books are packed. Anna From feenyjam at msu.edu Wed Apr 27 17:45:35 2005 From: feenyjam at msu.edu (greenfirespike) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 17:45:35 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128159 Eustace_Scrubb says: > As GEO pointed out in another post, the question JKR says we > should ask is "Why did Voldemort survive?" not "Why did Harry > survive?" > > And your conclusion, "LV casts the AK on himself," I would > guess is why JKR is telling us to ask why LV survived that > encounter. If an AK rebounded on him, why didn't he die? Greenfirespike says: There is a length of time (although I am not sure exactly how long) between when LV hears about "the prophecy," and his attack in Godric's Hollow. LV probably didn't just hear about the prophecy and charge on the attack. In fact, several events must occur prior to LV's attack on the Potter family. First, LV must figure out who all of the wizarding community has recently had a child, and if the child's parents have thrice defied the Dark Lord. Second, LV must decide that it is Harry and not Neville who the prophecy is talking about. Third, somehow, word gets to the OP that LV is looking for the Potters, and they are sent into hiding. Fourth, LV receives information from PP of where the Potters are hiding, and makes his attack. (Sadly, there is little canon information suggesting how much time elapsed between these events.) All the while LV must be worried about his newborn rival. I am sure he decided that he is going to have to take certain steps (certain dark magic steps I'm sure) to help him prepare for any encounter he may have with Harry. It seems unlikely that LV felt that he would be able to track down the Potters and destroy baby!Harry well before the boy grew to an adult wizard. PP giving LV the whereabouts of the Potters was probably a stroke of luck. In fact, JKR's question itself implies that LV felt the need to take precautionary steps to prepare for his upcoming fight with Harry. I believe that LV was surprised when PP showed up knowing where the Potters were hiding. This supports my idea that LV attacked Harry in haste, wishing to act immediately on difficult to obtain information. LV's hasty attack in Gordic's Hollow against baby!Harry may be one reason why he didn't expect the love shield to protect Harry. LV likely assumed that because he had dispatched with the Lily and James, that killing baby!Harry would be easy. Just MO. Greenfirespike From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 22:57:55 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 22:57:55 -0000 Subject: #3 in Snape's Trial (was: Accio 2005 press release...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128160 >>Alla: >Guilty, Betsy, you know he is. :-) On Items 1, 2 and 4 for sure and 3 - well, lets' wait and see.< Betsy: Snape's work as a spy for the Order has already cleared Snape of items 1 and 2, as seen in GoF. >>Alla: >How do you know that Snape is not Neville's biggest fear anymore?< Betsy: I don't *know*, I just hope that Neville has moved beyond his wussiness of yesteryear and developed into someone with a bit more of a spine. He stood up to Bellatrix, Snape should be easy for him now. >>Alla: >By the way, who said that Neville is going to be my only witness? >Does throwing Harry out of his office rings any bells to you for example?< Betsy: As an example of Snape taking an action designed to *prevent* visiting serious bodily harm upon a student, yes throwing Harry out of his office does ring a few bells. And considering everything else Harry has put up with from teachers, Snape is the *least* of his worries. >>Alla: >Do I have to count how many times Snape stands over Neville or Harry in the classroom in the threatening manner? OK, probably those are not enough for criminal prosecution in RL, but will do quite well in this one, IMO.< Betsy: But doesn't that just go towards Carol's argument that this is a kangaroo court? It's the equivilent of throwing someone behind bars because they looked at you funny - tyrannical in the extreme. >>Alla: >Here is the definition of assault fron on line dictionary. >I especially love the part "or even holding up the fist at him in a threatening or insulting manner".< Betsy: I... It's... You do see the madness therein, don't you? I mean, all of Gryffindor would be in jail, and I'm talking Dean and Seamus and Neville here. In an argument over quidditch teams. Betsy, who's reached her posting limit of 3. (There is still a limit, right?) From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 18:07:59 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 11:07:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The boys holding the prophecy In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050427180759.96674.qmail@web30714.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128161 > Megan Wrote: > The only people who can pick up their prophecies from the > DoM are those with their names on it. DD said that > Harry's name was added to the prophecy AFTER the attack at > GH. That is one reason why the (?) was beside his name. > The DoM was not SURE if this is what the prophecy meant but > since LV chose to "mark" Harry, he is the obvious person the > prophecy is talking about. Laurie writes: That is my interpretation of events as well. Still I cling to the idea that some how Neville will surprise us all in the end and turn out to be the one prophesied and not Harry. Laurie (who's rooting for a real SURPRISE end in book seven) From gelite67 at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 23:35:50 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 23:35:50 -0000 Subject: Mechanics of the Pesieve/Lost Prophecy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128162 I know there have been threads discussing whether the prophecy that was revealed in OOP is "complete." Without opening that specific can of worms, the issue nonetheless raised a question in my mind regarding how DD could have presented an incomplete prophecy to Harry using the Pensieve. Since DD retrieved the prophecy from his memory in the Pensieve, it seems to me the only way the prophecy could be incomplete is if: 1) The prophecy was incomplete when uttered by Sybill; 2) DD's memory is faulty (as if!) but the Pensieve truly reflects what he remembers; or 3) DD somehow "edited" the memory before retrieving it from the Pensieve. I think the first method is unlikely. Sybill is a bit loopy, no doubt, but when the Inner Eye strikes her, it seems to strike completely and involuntarily. Nor do I think the second alternative is likely simply because this was too important to DD for him to forget part of it. I'd bet a thousand Galleons he went straight to the Pensieve the first chance he got so he could "review" the prophecy ad nauseum. But the third . . . DD seems to follow the same routine as he followed before when retrieving memories -- he uses his wand to prod the silvery substance. However, immediately before doing that, he also appeared to be siphoning thoughts/memories and placing them in the Pensieve. Could that be a method of editing the memory? And now that I think about it, thoughts and memories are two very different things, but the pensieve apparently holds both? Angie (who wishes she had Pensieve just for HP info!) From jmrazo at hotmail.com Wed Apr 27 23:37:12 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 23:37:12 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter and Ender's Game In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128163 > Betsy: > I don't want to get into a huge discussion about Peter Wiggin (not > the place, obviously) -- but here's my view on Voldemort. Voldemort > is evil, a true sociopath of Hitchcock-ian levels. If Voldemort > gets his way he will destroy not only the muggle world but the > Wizarding World as well. (I suspect that old Voldie was none too > pleased with his mother, either. How could he hold her in anything > but contempt? A witch of her bloodlines consorting with a muggle, > and getting herself in such a bad state of dependence on that muggle > she dies when he deserts her. No, I'm quite sure Voldemore would be > well pleased to see the WW burn.) Peter, for all his many faults, > saves his world from a bloody war and leaves it in a state of > strong, healthy stability (all from Ender's Game). I agree that Peter uses his tools to a generally more positive end but I still see a strong connection between him and Voldemort. The way he lays low and builds his support sounds very similar to Voldemorts tactics. His personal level of sadism and love of being feared is again pretty similar (on a more juvenile level, of course) to Voldemort. The way he manages to use the people around him, even when they hate him, seems pretty Voldemorty imo. Plus the sheer power of Peter's ego. Can't forget that part. > Hermione, on the other hand.... Of course I don't think the girl is > bent on world domination (though she does seem quite interested in > making over the current WW). But she has a definite streak of > ruthlessness none of the other Hogwarts students have shown to > possess. Hermione is not stupid. Part of her *had* to know she > was putting Umbridge's life on the line. One could also argue that > her trick with the House Elves in OotP, hiding clothing about the > room, speaks to a certain ruthless disregard of other beings' > thoughts and desires. (Valentine would *never* show such a lack of > empathy.) No, Hermione isn't nearly the shade of gray Peter Wiggin is, but she ain't no shining beacon of white either. Hermione has Peter's holier than thou attitude, to be sure, but I think she is a lot less ruthless and a little more shortsighted than you give her credit for. she seemed pretty caught off guard by the sheer viciousness of the Centaurs. Peter would never have put himself in danger that way without thinking things through a whole lot more. Plus, I personally think Hermione screams Valentine (to me at least). I just see the two of them in the same vein spiritually. > Betsy: > I think that while Graff's angst comes through in his weight gain > and his self-deprecating humor, Dumbledore's comes through in his > unwillingness to pull Harry into the war. Of course, Graff has been > in the position of turning highly gifted children into weapons for > years before Ender comes on the scene. Dumbledore is brand new to > the position. I think the lack of experience comes out. This is where I think the OOTP characterization of DD falls down imo. This is the same person who showed Harry how to travel through *time*. something that could get him wiped out of existence if he made a misstep. And he did it in the name of man he couldn't possibly have been sure was innocent. This was the guy who knows Harry killed a Basilisk in single combat and outflew a dragon. Before OOTP it seemed to me like Dumbledore did respect Harry's abilities and didn't want to coddle him. then OOTP comes along and poof! Wuss!Dumbledore makes his first appearance. Graff and DD both needed children, and I just respect Graff's methods more. > Betsy: > It lends a certain strength to the argument that maybe a weapon > would prefer to be treated like a weapon. (Of course Ender has a > nervous breakdown mid-novel so there's that.) Seriously, I think > that was Dumbledore's big mistake -- the one he fully admits to. He > cannot see past the child Harry to see the strong wizard within. Once again, flaw in characterization. No evidence that before OOTP DD failed to see the strong wizard within. (Maybe Snape is one of the few who actually do? I admit, I threw > that in to raise ire. I'm that kind of bad. ) Don't do that to me! I'm young, but I could still stroke out! >I fully expect > things to change in HBP (an expectation boosted by various covers) > and Dumbledore to start treating Harry like the strong wizard Harry can be. I hope so. I want to see kick ass Harry in more than just fan fics. >>Phoenixgod: > > >The only thing Snape and Rackham have in common is that Snape > should be shot into a wide elipical orbit around earth too.< > > Betsy: > But where would that leave the Order? Snape is one of its strongest > members. 'cause he was so useful in OOTP. I just don't see it. > Betsy: > Ah. I see our differences over Snape are near insurmountable. (I > could say I was surprised but... ) True that! I actually think Snape *is* a > war-hero (not a celebrated one because - spy) and a good teacher. If I taught like Snape I wouldn't have the job I do. As for being a war hero, I don't think so. he is merely an uncharged war criminal. Plenty of nazi scientists did things that they should have been executed for, but they were given cushy jobs instead because they were judged more useful alive. Even if DD *had* to spare Snape's life, there had to be a better way than giving him a job at Hogwarts. I am a teacher and I find the very idea of Snape's teaching methods offensive and the fact that people defend him inconcievable. I get some of the best results in my school on standardized tests and I do it without browbeating, insulting, or demeaning my students. If Snape can't do the same he shouldn't be teaching and DD shouldn't have hired him. no amount of Order use justifies letting that absolutely horrific human being anywhere near children and possibly sacrificing their education. > Betsy: > Except of course Fake!Moody was *not* trying to help Harry win. Sure he was. He was just doing it for really bad reasons. >And > he didn't share any of his knowledge of the enemy with anyone (until > drugged). It certainly seemed to me like he was sharing some genuine insights with his students. the twins certainly think 'he really knows' (or something like that) >And I wouldn't call his teaching style uncompromising. Bouncing ferret discipline technique! >And of course he reached a > level of teacher to student cruelty not matched until Umbridge > pulled out her blood quill. And rather than leaving Harry in a > position of strength and stability, Fake!Moody was probably directly > responsible for some of Harry's paranoia and capslock-ing in OotP. > Fake!Moody was cool like a child molester is fun: the fact that the > kids loved him was all part of his sick trap. I agree with you but many of his lessons and advice saved Harry's life during and after GoF. I wonder how much of FakeMoody's lessons made it to the DA. He was a good teacher, maybe the best Harry's had, even if he was doing it for nefarious reasons. the Imperious Resistance alone proved invaluable. > Betsy: > Just going by Ender's Game alone, I think Bean provided more > background and moral support than anything else, especially with > his, "the enemy's gate is *down*" cry at the final battle. Just as > Neville, merely by sticking by Harry's side and refusing to back > down in the battle at the DoM helped keep Harry going, I think. I > don't think Neville will steal any of Harry's thunder (something I > didn't honestly see the Shadow books doing with Ender, myself) but I > think he may provide that extra bit of support, even if it's just in > the form of a rallying cry. Huh, I think you might be the first person I've ever talked to who didn't think Ender's Shadow stole Ender's thunder. Bean was made out to be Ender's superior in almost every way except for leadership quality. Bean had a very power behind the throne mindset, but he lessed Ender in my view. I do agree with you though that Neville was an important rallying point for Harry in the DoM battle. > Betsy, who thinks Ender's Game is a classic piece of literature that > should be on everyone's bookshelf, and that the Shadow series is a > fun and exciting read that pales in comparison to the original, but > is well worth the read, if only for Bean. Ender's Game is indeed a classic piece of Scifi literature and the rest of his books fall so far below that mark I can't even begin to express my disappointment. phoenixgod2000, who doesn't want to talk about Snape anymore. he's too tired. From bboyminn at yahoo.com Wed Apr 27 23:44:26 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 23:44:26 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater In-Reply-To: <20050424052020.2417.qmail@web8506.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128164 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Subhash Sane wrote: > > > > Today we'll talk about ... `Percy Ignatius Weasley'. > > > > ... Ron had correctly pointed out that Percy would do ANYTHING for > a bit of power. > > He just hates for being poor. ... > > Though Percy was in Gryffindor, he was more Slytherinish. ... > > But after a year, his all dreams just crashed like a castle of > playing cards. Cornelius Fudge was proven guilty for his acts. > ...edited... bboyminn: I am a hardcore die-hard member of the P.I.N.E club (Percy Is Not Evil), plus I have my own, oft published, opinions on Percy's personality, some of which I shall touch on here. I think there is a much more simple explanation as to why Percy does what he does, and it doesn't require any grand or elaborate plot. It's as simple as this, Percy is obsessed with doing what is /right/. I suspect the obsession with /right/ is an offshoot of Percy's family dynamic which is strongly driven by the Twins. The Twins seem to be well liked and popular, in addition, the don't mind a 'spot of bother'. They are constantly causing trouble which makes Molly's life very difficult. Percy on the other hand over-compensates for the Twins, by doing just the opposite. He does everything right and tries his hardest to give Molly the least grief, and in his own way is reward by Molly for this. Unfortunately this just amplifies the dynamic between Percy and the Twins. The more Percy is rewarded for 'doing it right', the more the Twins give him grief for it which in turn gets them into trouble with Molly, which they then partly blame on Percy. This creates a dynamic that widens the gulf between the Twins and Percy. Now the tricky part, people love outlaws, and people hate rule loving prudes. There is an old country and western song that goes, 'Ladies love outlaws like babies love stray dogs, and ladies take to outlaws like a banker takes to gold...'. If you don't think that's true then explain why so many fans are enamored with Draco and why so many fans are drawn to Slytherin house? Certainly, among fellow students the Twins are much more liked and admired for their fun loving mischief making than Percy is for is bossy rule following. And that very much flies in the face of Percy's dysfunctional life philosophy. The supposed Rules of Life say that those who obey the rules are rewarded and admired, those who break the rules are decried and punished. Much to Percy's frustration, he discovers that the world generally ignores what it claims are the 'rules for life'. He's caught in an unresolvable paradox. None the less, Percy, while generally scorned and disliked, is still sufficiently rewarded that he doesn't abandon his life-logic-path. So, what is Percy's life-logic-path, and how does it apply to his life at the Ministry? Percy does not seek ruthless power and wealth. Much like Ron, what Percy truly seeks is achievement, recognition, and success. It's true, Percy doesn't approve of some of the decisions his father has made in his own life, but that doesn't mean he truly bears ill-will or dislike for his father. Unfortunately, Percy has a great deal of frustration building up in his life, mostly caused by the Twins who constantly ridicule him for his chosen path of /Right/. This frustration is now compounded by the less than ideal circumstances that surrounded his first job at the Ministry, and further compunded by the obvious grief the Twins most likley gave him. Again, Percy did his best to do what was right. He was deferential and respectful of his superiors, he trusted in authority, he did everything he thought was right, and once again it defied the Rules of Life and went against him. All this frustration finally comes to a full boil when despite the dark turns of his first job, he is now proven right. He has work hard, done what was right, followed the rules, and is now rewarded and recognize for his effort by landing the very prestigious job as personal assistant to the Minister of Magic himself. If that doesn't vindicate Percy and prove the trouble making Twins wrong then nothing does. But what happens? He gets home, and not so much as a 'well done'. Not the slightest acknowledgement that doing the right thing is indeed the right thing to do. That was it, full boil went to full steam, and Percy blew up with justifiable anger (in my opinion) that was just a undiplomatic and ill-advised as Arthur's response. Percy is not evil, he is just misguide and frustrated. He doesn't want power and wealth, he wasn't success, recognition, and achievement; all very admirable and very right goals. Without a doubt, I state with absolute certainly that Percy will redeem himself, and prove that he is at heart a true Weasley and a true Gryffindor. Remember you heard it here first...again. Steve/bboyminn From ayaneva at aol.com Wed Apr 27 23:45:10 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 23:45:10 -0000 Subject: Snape's Purpose And Why It Might Be Safe To Trust Him - (was Snape's Purpose) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128165 > Potioncat wrote: > Well, to a certain extent, Snape is the best there is. Here's a > man who is loyal to DD who was once part of LV's organization. He > appears to be a powerful wizard himself (open to debate, I know). > He has some rare gifts and inside knowledge. He seems determined > to protect Harry. He's one heck of a jerk, and a terrible teacher. > He appears to have taken on this role out of obligation/duty > rather than because he wants it. Snape seems to be willing to go > against his natural inclinations for the good of the Order. (At > least he tried, I think.) (Appears to, seems to...very nurse-like > charting here.) Oh! You know I can't resist a Snape discussion where I can ramble on philosophically. I was half asleep (or maybe completely asleep) last night and I had a sudden epiphany about Snape. Or maybe it classifies more as one of my characteristically ambiguous and obtuse ramblings. By the way, that's obtuse as in the secondary definition of the word meaning, "difficult to comprehend: not clear or precise in thought or expression." My picture's right beside that definition. Anyway, my epiphany was this: Snape, whether Rowling intended it or not, reminds me of a Van Gogh painting. Particularly, Van Gogh's "Wheat Field With Crows." You can see a reproduction here, sorry it's smaller than I'd like: http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/artists/vincent_van_gogh/index_van_gogh.html I'm not sure how to explain this comparison, although I had it all worked out in my sleep. But I'll give it a go. We'll do the painting first. Keep in mind that art history is really subjective, so this, as always, is just how I read the painting. We put a little of ourselves into each work of art that we look at anyway. The painting just looks like a pretty view of a field at first glance, but take it apart first and then put it all together again, and it's overwhelming. The painting is really a journey, not just a landscape. Here's how: You're being sucked into, and smothered by, an endless field, swamped by a flock of crows, and the night sky is so oppressive, you think you're going to be crushed by it. BUT if you look hard enough, there's an opening and a point of light all the way at the end. It's the focal point of the painting. Actually, it's the whole point of the painting. Not the field, or the road, not the sky, or the crows. It's the end goal, that little opening of light, which signifies the end of the journey. That's how I see Snape. I'm not paying particular attention to all of the unpleasant bits, which at first glance, make him seem absolutely hopeless. Those parts are like the elements of the painting that make it seem as though you're going to be crushed by it all. It seems as hopeless an endeavor to try to pass through to the end of the wild vortex, as it is to think of Snape beyond his visible and immediate actions/characteristics. But once you wade through all of the unpleasantries, you reach the endpoint, that tiny little bit of light, which seemed so impossible to reach when you started off. You realize that he is an honorable man where it counts the most, in an odd sort of way. At the end of it all, he has worth because all of those things that you said of Snape are true, Potioncat. Just like when you wade through the wheat field and everything else and once you've made it that far, you realize what was most important was the end. Not negating the journey itself, but you can't let yourself be distracted by trials; concentrate on the endpoint. Don't get distracted by Snape's idiosyncrasies; concentrate on what's really past all of that. The importance of the journey is, like always, if it wasn't so hard, would you appreciate reaching your goal as much? AyanEva (untying her brain from the knots she just put it in) From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 00:16:44 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:16:44 -0000 Subject: #3 in Snape's Trial (was: Accio 2005 press release...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128166 Alla: Here is the definition of assault fron on line dictionary. I especially love the part "or even holding up the fist at him in a threatening or insulting manner".< Betsy: I... It's... You do see the madness therein, don't you? I mean, all of Gryffindor would be in jail, and I'm talking Dean and Seamus and Neville here. In an argument over quidditch teams. Alla: It is besides the point, IMO, Gryffindor boys are NOT the ones on trial here. :-) I am just saying that it is VERY easy to charge Snape with asssault. Are there others who could be charged? Sure, but the purpose of the mock trial Accio will be playing is to charge Snape and Snape only, right? By the way, I want to clarify something - I definitely think that Snape HAS a problem,which can make him assault students, but I do NOT think that this IS the main charge Snape should be charged with. I mean, they mention psychological harm FROM assault and battery, but I would charge Snape with psychological abuse first and foremost and THEN use of physical force. > Betsy, who's reached her posting limit of 3. (There is still a > limit, right?) Alla, for whom this is post number four, but who does not remember that posting limit was ever made official and if it is not so, apologises . From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 28 00:24:53 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:24:53 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? How to contain it? In-Reply-To: <426F01FC.20005@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128167 Kathy writes: I have a question. How can the Keeper of Prophecies just decide what a prophecy means, or who it affects, on his own and just change the prophecy orb to relate to a specific person? Does the Wizengamot make the decision? Could he have made a mistake????? Bookworm: That was my first thought when Dumbledore told Harry that the Keeper had changed the designation. Just to confuse matters, a few lines later, Dumbledore says "I'm afraid there's not mistake" (or something like that). So the next question is: why is Dumbledore so sure? Ravenclaw Bookworm From jaanise at hello.lv Thu Apr 28 00:26:47 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:26:47 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000501c54b88$f823ac10$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128168 -----Original Message----- From: Steve I am a hardcore die-hard member of the P.I.N.E club (Percy Is Not Evil), plus I have my own, oft published, opinions on Percy's personality, some of which I shall touch on here. I think there is a much more simple explanation as to why Percy does what he does, and it doesn't require any grand or elaborate plot. It's as simple as this, Percy is obsessed with doing what is /right/. (..) He gets home, and not so much as a 'well done'. Not the slightest acknowledgement that doing the right thing is indeed the right thing to do. That was it, full boil went to full steam, and Percy blew up with justifiable anger (in my opinion) that was just a undiplomatic and ill-advised as Arthur's response. -------------------------- Jaanis: How much Percy may ignore the rules of life (as you called it), I think it was very rude of him to send his mother's Christmas present back. I don't belive Percy is evil or on the side of Voldemort too, I'm merely watching him in the books without making any judgement (which could prove wrong later on). Still I was very surprised (unpleasantly, of course) by his reaction, it would be quite an obstacle to redeeming himself. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 28 00:43:19 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:43:19 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128169 CMC: This passage implies to me that to some extent, Hermione's parents keep themselves willfully ignorant about the WW, that Hermione has tried to talk to them about Hogwarts (though probably not the deadlier episodes) only to be met with varying levels of incomprehension. Bookworm: It doesn't have to mean that they are *willfully* ignorant. I remember visiting my parents when both my sisters, my brother-in- law, my husband and I were all present - all of us in the military. We frequently had to stop and "translate" what we were saying for my parents even thought they had both been in the military too (many years before). The Grangers may try to understand, but just have no reference points in this different culture. Hermione holding back information (as I'm sure she does - how many teenagers tell their parents *everything*?) wouldn't help clarify their understanding. Ravenclaw Bookworm From jaanise at hello.lv Thu Apr 28 00:56:59 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:56:59 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? How to contain it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54b8d$2ed155b0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128170 -----Original Message----- From: Bookworm That was my first thought when Dumbledore told Harry that the Keeper had changed the designation. Just to confuse matters, a few lines later, Dumbledore says "I'm afraid there's not mistake" (or something like that). So the next question is: why is Dumbledore so sure? -------------------------- Jaanis: I guess it's the same when we are sure of anything. It just is apparent, and that's all. For example, when some kid approaches, his mouth dirty with something brown and shiny, and he holds an open chocolate ice-cream in his hand, partly eaten. What do you think is the dirt on his mouth? A chocolate maybe? Why are you so sure? All the evidence seemed convincing enough for Dumbledore, tha the prophecy is talking about Harry. Or to be more precise, the prophecy itself didn't mention Harry, but mentioned a boy who will be marked by the Dark Lord. And Harry got marked by him, and also all the other mentioned conditions match. So he turned out to be the boy the prophecy is about. I presume that Dumbledore is not the only who understands it and is sure about what the prophecy says. It may seem confusing to Harry from whose POV all the HP books are written. So, we as the readers along with Harry may perceive that the prophecy is not clear enough. But it apparently is clear for those who had heard it before and had time to think about it calmly. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 01:17:41 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:17:41 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording prophecy wording - why repeat it it? How to contain it? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128171 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ravenclaw Bookworm" wrote: > > Kathy writes: > I have a question. How can the Keeper of Prophecies just decide > what a prophecy means, or who it affects, on his own and just > change the prophecy orb to relate to a specific person? Does the > Wizengamot make the decision? Could he have made a mistake????? > > Angie replies (in trembling whisper, bracelets a-jangle): Ah, my dear, you must have the Inner Eye -- I've been on Prophecy kick the last few days and I've wondered this myself. :) Ater all, it was Lucius Malfoy, not DD, who told Harry that only a person whom the prophecy is "about" can retrieve it from the DOM -- but what if whoever "interpreted" the prophesy gets wrong? For example, what if Neville was really the one the prophesy was about; could he have retrieved it, even though his name wasn't on it? Was Harry able to retrieve it because he is the one it was "about" or because his name was on it? From navarro198 at hotmail.com Thu Apr 28 01:26:50 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:26:50 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater In-Reply-To: <000501c54b88$f823ac10$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128172 Jaanis: How much Percy may ignore the rules of life (as you called it), I think it was very rude of him to send his mother's Christmas present back. Bookworm: I have to agree with Jaanis here. There was no apparent need for Percy to be that rude. Steve/bboyminn: He does everything right and tries his hardest to give Molly the least grief, and in his own way is reward by Molly for this. Bookworm: It's been my observation that children who try so hard to be that "good" have something in their background that causes that. (We have a young student at school that has been described by both the teacher and other parents as "very well behaved" and "having the best manners" - unnaturally so. His home life is extremely tumultuous, and this seems to be his way of coping.) So I wonder, what could have happened when Percy was a small child to cause this reaction? He would have been five y/o at the time of Godric's Hollow; the twins would have been about three. If something happened a couple of years before GH, the twins might have been too young to know about it, but Percy would be at a very impressionable age. Charlie and Bill, by contrast, may have been old enough to put whatever it was into context, so it didn't affect them the same way. (Mr. Weasley's description of the Dark Mark at the QWC comes to mind.) Ravenclaw Bookworm From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 01:31:21 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:31:21 -0000 Subject: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128173 What the heck did DD mean in OOP when he told Harry that, "He [LV} set out to kill you when you were still a baby, believing he was fulfulling the terms of the prophecy. He discovered, to his cost,that he was mistaken, when the curse intended to kill you backfired." LV was mistaken because the curse backfired? The curse backfired because he was not fulfilling the terms of the prophesy? I understand that LV didn't hear all of the prophesy, but I don't understand how he was "mistaken" -- didn't he fulfull the first part of the prophesy re marking Harry as his equal (assuming the marking is the attempt to kill Harry)? If it was a "mistake" to attempt to hear Harry without hearing the full prophesy, the old Voldy has made several mistakes since SS. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 01:37:31 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 01:37:31 -0000 Subject: Knowledge to Destroy Harry? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128174 DD implies in OOP that the prophesy would tell LV how to destroy Harry. He tells Harry that since Harry's escape in GOF, "he {LV} has been determined to hear that prophesy in its entirety. This is the weapon he has been seeking so assiduously since his return: the knowledge of how to destroy you." I don't understand this for two reasons: 1) To me, the prophesy (as we know it) doesn't even hint at how to destroy Harry, unless LV is going to "hand" him to death. 2) It seems apparent that LV believes the AK curse will kill/destroy Harry, since he attempts to use in on him in GOF/OOP. So what other method of killing/destruction does the prophesy give him? I suppose it's possible that LV thinks the prophesy will give him that info, but that doesn't seem to me to be what DD says or even implies. Angie From Lynx412 at AOL.com Thu Apr 28 01:37:42 2005 From: Lynx412 at AOL.com (Lynx412 at AOL.com) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 21:37:42 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? Message-ID: <1d7.3b791ce9.2fa19866@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128175 In a message dated 4/27/2005 9:32:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, gelite67 at yahoo.com writes: > I understand that LV didn't hear all of the prophesy, but I don't > understand how he was "mistaken" -- didn't he fulfull the first part > of the prophesy re marking Harry as his equal (assuming the marking is > the attempt to kill Harry)? I think the point DD was making is that if he'd done NOTHING, if he'd not attacked either boy, neither of them would have been 'marked', he'd have won and he'd have not spent 15 or so years floating around as vapormort. The Other Cheryl [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 02:02:39 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 02:02:39 -0000 Subject: Failed AK Curse -- What's Love Got to Do With It? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128176 Were Voldemort's powers broken simply because his attempt to kill Harry as an infant was unsuccessful or because the spell rebounded on him? (Seems only fitting to me that if you try to perform the AK curse and fail, something like that should happen. Also seems like LV would have died instead of turning to Vapormort if he hadn't taken those mysterious steps to guard against mortality.) Also, we've been told that LV/Quirrell couldn't stand to touch Harry in SS b/c of Lily's sacrifice. But have we actually been told that this love-sacrifice is the reason the AK curse didn't kill Harry? (I've read the series several times and can't believe I don't know the answer to this question.) I don't think we have because that seems to be one of the unsolved mysteries. From ABadgerFan2 at msn.com Thu Apr 28 02:27:32 2005 From: ABadgerFan2 at msn.com (abadgerfan2) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 02:27:32 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: <9.42ef418d.2fa15048@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128177 My guesstimate is that the pensieve contains the memories of the person we learn to be the Half-Blood prince, Godric Gryffindor! And the pensieve is the means through which Dumbledore helps to explain to Harry the "bad blood" between Gryffindor and Slytherin, and its implications as to the present day representative of Slytherin's views, Lord Voldemort. Can't wait to find out, for sure! --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Lynx412 at A... wrote: > In a message dated 4/27/2005 2:43:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, > willsonkmom at m... writes: > > > Potioncat: > > More important than whose pensieve is it, IMO, is whose memories are > > in it? Harry's Dumbledores? I wouldn't think they'd be looking into > > someone else's memories....uh, oh...Merlin help them if it's Snape's > > thoughts!! > > > > The other question is, does the green light have any meaning to the > > story? If, a big IF, the artist read the book and knows there's a > > scene that involves a green light, then the light is a clue to us. > > But if an artist just chose green for some random reason, it isn't a > > clue at all. And as much fun as it is to try to guess what might be, > > I still haven't figured out the jacket of the US OoP. > > Green light. Interesting. Perhaps they are looking at Harry's memories > of the AK at GH. Perhaps the Pensieve and HBP contain the answer to JKR's > "Why did Voldemort survive?" question. What would happen to someone who wandered > into the path of an AK inside someone else's memory? > > The Other Cheryl > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 28 02:58:38 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 02:58:38 -0000 Subject: #3 in Snape's Trial (was: Accio 2005 press release...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128178 > Alla: I am just saying that it is VERY easy to charge Snape with > asssault. Are there others who could be charged? Sure, but the > purpose of the mock trial Accio will be playing is to charge Snape > and Snape only, right? > Potioncat: Does anyone know how this trial will play out and whether it will be available to those of us who cannot participate in ACCIO? BTW, is ACCIO an American convention? It does sound like fun, and I'm going to change something I said earlier: I said Snape would need a good defense lawyer, and he will, but I think he's actually innocent of these charges. We won't really know until the last page of book 7, but I think he is loyal to DD. As for the assault...nah. The reason I say that is that in England at that time, IIRC, physical punishment was still legal. So grabbing a student by the arm and shaking him would not be assault. And standing over a student with a disaproving expression wouldn't be assault either. On a totally different thread, I wish we could see McGonagall's and Snape's reactions to the Black Quill. Alla, you make a good point, whether or not others could be charged is not relevant to Snape's being charged. But I offer this, the twins could be charged with assualt on Montague. They were adults at the time and their actions caused serious injuries. And, one more thing, in my county, according to Mom-talk, a teenager at the local middle school (age 12-14) who "pantsed" another boy has been charged with sexual assualt. Severus on trial this year: James on trial next year. Potioncat From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 28 03:06:56 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:06:56 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: <426ECCA8.00000C.03604@D33LDD51> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128179 Donna wrote: > I'm relatively new here so be patient with me. > > I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting > her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering > if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. Potioncat: Well, this is a good question. But I think the explanation is more literary than realistic. For the plot to work, the kids have to be on their own. To a certain extent, adults have to fail. This is true when you wonder where the heck the teachers were in SS/PS when H/R/H went after the stone. To be honest, it was several readings into the books before I thought to wonder why the Weasleys or the Grangers could just send their kids off for ten months and think no more about it. It just has to be. Might as well wonder how a broom can fly. Potioncat: BTW, how does a broom fly? (I've seen a horse fly, but I've never seen a broom fly.) From frugalarugala at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 03:09:47 2005 From: frugalarugala at yahoo.com (frugalarugala) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:09:47 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128180 > "Donna" wrote: > > > I'm a parent and I've wondered about Hermione's parents letting > > > her go to the WW with all the ugly stuff going on. I'm wondering > > > if Hermione is keeping things from her parents. > > > > > Valky: > Second here! Welcome Donna and I totally agree with Lea. Hermione > doesn't tell them anything about the bad stuff. [snippity] > I would expect them to start finding out in coming books though, as > Hermione comes of age and more bold about what she shares with her > parents. [snip] Frug says: Yeah, add me to the ranks of those who believe she keeps them largely in the dark. Actually, I think it might be one more example of Hermione's arrogance and mothering tendencies, just like her knowing what's best for the house elves and taking care of Harry and Ron. I'd imagine she thinks of it as protecting them from worry. Actually, I doubt she's ever warned her parents or considered the possible targets they might be to the Death Eaters. I wonder if it isn't a parallel scenario to Lily Evans and what happened to Harry's grandparents... --Frugalarugala, who been writing fanfiction, and has discovered that her computer is in love with Lucius Malfoy--it keeps suggesting 'Luscious' every time I start to type his name! From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 03:29:41 2005 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 03:29:41 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128181 It's pretty amazing how many meanings we can read into these seven lines, but in the last few days I've been thinking about a slightly different angle. Lets look at the prophecy from Voldy's POV. Try to forget for a moment that you know the second half, and look only at the part that HE knows: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies..." To focus things even more, I'll make the (admittedly dangerous) assumption that the two last subparts of the above are merely identifiers of "the one". So assuming for a moment both Voldy and DD correctly identified Harry, the part that Voldy knows all boils down, in the end, to: "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches". Read that again. ALL of Voldemort's strategy since before GH and throughout the series has been based on this single sentence. And of course on his guess regarding the part that he doesn't know, which apparently wasn't a very good guess. If we are ready to take DD's word, he tells us several additional things about Voldemort's view of the prophecy. First, it seems that before GH Voldy didn't see the prophecy as a threat at all. DD words are: "He set out to kill you when you were still a baby, believing he was fulfilling the terms of the prophecy. He discovered, to his cost, that he was mistaken, when the curse intended to kill you backfired." Several paragraphs later DD stresses again that, until GH, Voldy didn't realize that baby Harry could be dangerous: "He heard only the beginning, the part foretelling the birth of a boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. Consequently, he could not warn his master that to attack you would be to risk transferring power to you, and marking you as his equal. So Voldemort never knew that there might be danger in attacking you, that it might be wise to wait, to learn more. He did not know that you would have power the Dark Lord knows not." DD also tells us about Voldemort's current guess regarding the second half of the prophecy: "And so, since his return to his body, and particularly since your extraordinary escape from him last year, he has been determined to hear that prophecy in its entirety. This is the weapon he has been seeking so assiduously since his return: the knowledge of how to destroy you." I know I'm not the only member who has a problem with these words of DD, "the knowledge of how to destroy you." The second half doesn't seem to contain any special knowledge how to destroy Harry. But Voldy thinks it does. To summarize the above, it seems that Voldy first treated the prophecy as a chance rather than a threat. He didn't imagine that "the power" is something he doesn't know. When he went to GH he believed that he was actually "fulfilling the terms of the prophecy". He seemed to think that the other half, the part that he didn't hear, says that the Dark Lord will kill Harry. After GH and even after the graveyard this view didn't change much. The difference is only that now he thinks the other part contains special instructions how to kill Harry, and that he failed several times just because he didn't follow these instructions. Now, why would Voldy think that the prophecy is a chance rather than a threat? There aren't many possibilities here. We're talking about a single sentence. Look at it again with my added emphasis: "The ONE with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches". Of course this is a chance rather than a threat. This is wonderful. We are talking about a person that his greatest ambition in life is to become immortal, and now he's told that the only one who can kill him is a mere baby. Get rid of this single baby, and no one (not even "the only one he ever feared") will be able to kill him. To Voldy this prophecy must have sounded like the greatest Christmas present ever. But wait a minute. This is too much of a coincidence for me. A man with a great dream to become immortal, and no qualms about killing people since he was sixteen, suddenly receives a notice that he can become immortal if he just kills one additional baby. Nope, this is a bit too good to happen by chance, or even by the author's hand. Someone must have made it happen, and the one with the motive is Voldy himself. Besides, he seems to rely too much on this single "one". If it said "the ONLY one with the power" I could understand why he's so sure. But remember Voldy never heard the part about "either must die by the hand of the other". So how can he be so certain that only Harry can kill him? Perhaps because the prophecy didn't come as a great surprise to him. Because he made it happen. What, after all, were all these experiments about? In the Edinburgh Book Festival, http://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/news_view.cfm?id=80 when JKR presented her famous question why Voldemort didn't die in GH, she said: "At the end of Goblet of Fire he says that one or more of the steps that he took enabled him to survive. You should be wondering what he did to make sure that he did not die ? I will put it that way. I don't think that it is guessable. It may be ? someone could guess it ? but you should be asking yourself that question, particularly now that you know about the prophecy. I'd better stop there or I will really incriminate myself." Note this subtle nuance. She didn't say "particularly now that you know the prophecy" but "now that you know ABOUT the prophecy" I've been suspecting for some time before the Edinburgh Book Festival that the important thing about the prophecy is not so much the words themselves, but what Voldy thinks they are. So maybe Voldemort's experiments were about binding his death to people. This can be a way to avoid death: bind your death to a certain person, so he's the only one who can kill you, then make sure he can't kill you. Maybe the DEs were Voldemort's first guinea pigs. He binds his death to one of them, then he makes them unable to kill him, by installing them with great fear and reverence to the Dark Lord. But there must have been problems with these early experiments. He probably found that this binding didn't survive the death of the bound person (or he would have no qualms killing a DE to ensure his own immortality). Perhaps these bindings were limited in time. Voldy needed to find out how to bind his death to a person for good, so that once he kills this person, he can't die anymore. And perhaps he found that the only way to do it is to bind his death to a certain unknown person. Perhaps only to a yet unborn person. The BIG spells always come with these small, annoying clauses. So Voldy conducts this big binding spell that will finally make him death proof, and the spell succeeds, only he doesn't know who the bound person is. Until he hears the first half of the prophecy, and everything becomes clear. Or so he thinks. But if Harry is the only person who can kill Voldemort, and this was a result of an experiment Voldemort had done, why indeed didn't Voldemort die in GH? Because the terms of the prophecy (and probably the terms of the original binding spell) say the Dark Lord can only die by Harry's hand. Had Voldemort died in GH it would have been by his own hand. So he didn't. Am I making sense? Neri From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 04:40:02 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 04:40:02 -0000 Subject: Prophecy's wording Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128182 "esmith222002" said: > I think the most interesting thing about the prophecy is revealed if you compare both of Trelawney's prophecies: No.1 IT WILL HAPPEN TONIGHT. 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 HE WAS. TONIGHT... BEFORE MIDNIGHT...THE SERVANT...WILL SET OUT...TO REJOIN...HIS MASTER.... No. 2 The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies... and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have powers that the Dark Lord knows not... and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives... the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies... > snip > Most damning of all is the presence of so many 'and's. You cannot construct a sentence this way. Conclusion - Dumbledore was only allowing Harry to hear certain parts of the prophecy, not the whole prophecy. Perhaps this is why DD was so uncomfortable talking to Harry about this. Once again he is not telling Harry the WHOLE truth! Brothergib >> Bonnie Now: This disturbs me greatly. Maybe you have something here. What if the missing part is the part that would tell LV how to destroy Harry? Harry seems so vulnerable. So often he's only escaped by chance. I was hoping DD was going to be open with Harry now. If DD is still keeping things to himself, I'm not a happy camper. I can see as someone mentioned (sorry, don't know who) that the reason LV didn't die at GH was because only Harry can kill him, and since it was LV's own AK he was only vaporized. My hope is that now Harry is thinking about the Prophecy and will come up with a brilliant solution of his own. He also better receive a whole lot more training. Everyone needs to acknowledge that Harry is the one and concentrate on preparing him for whatever. Also his friends need protection. Maybe the incomplete sentences and all the 'ands' are just for effect. Or maybe not. I'm so engrossed in HP I can't concentrate on any other books. I'm rereading them all again. I may well be a basket case before July 16. Bonnie (who needs a time turner so I can get to July 16 faster) From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Thu Apr 28 05:31:32 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 05:31:32 -0000 Subject: End of book seven - what happens? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128184 > > Karen: > > > > At 'the end' Harry is going to get Lord V into that room somehow. > > bboyminn: > > Actually not such a bad idea. > Harry has already been lured there once under false pretences, not > likely he will allow that to happen again. If voldie kidnapped > someone to lure Harry, why on earth, of all places, would he hold > them in the Ministry of Magic? Karen again: Ah, but what I meant was that this time it will be Harry who is doing the luring. Somehow someway Harry is going to get Lord V into the DoM not the other way around. Perhaps allowing it to be known that he is 'meeting with someone there to reveal the contents of the prophesy'? Lord V is certainly arrogant enough to think that Harry would be avoiding him at all costs and would not be expecting Harry to be actively seeking a confrontation so I think would fall for it. Karen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 05:45:13 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 05:45:13 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: <20050427194616.6812.qmail@web14323.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128185 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carol Thoma wrote: > --- Ali wrote: > > > 1. That the accused did, feloniously, treasonously > > and with malice aforethought, combine with others to > support the most bloody, abhominable and beastly cause > of the notorious, prescribed and avowed traitor Thomas > Marvolo Riddle, sometime called Lord Voldemort; > > > > 2. That the accused did, feloniously, treasonously > > and with malice aforethought, voluntarily accept > membership within a prescribed and illegal > organisation, vulgarly termed "the Death Eaters"; > > > > 3. That the accused, feloniously, treasonously and > > with malice aforethought, continues as a member in > said illegal organisation > > > > 4. That the accused has on divers occasions and > > under the guise of lawful chastisement committed > assault and battery on minors in respect of whom he > was in loco parentis, such assault and battery being > occasioned by divers magical and physical means, and > resulting in perceptible physical and psychological > harm to the said minors. > > Carol responds: > Shouldn't that be "proscribed," not "prescribed," in > item 2? > > BTW, sounds like a rigged trial, with the verdict > determined in advance. If Snape doesn't get off on > items 3 and 4, it's definitely a kangaroo court. > (Sounds like an accurate reflection of the corrupt > justice system in the WW.) I'll check out the site, > but it sounds as if pro-Snape or neutral/objective > input is a waste of time. > > Carol, who sometimes copyedits for Prometheus Books > but unfortunately wasn't assigned the Kern book > (assuming that he doesn't share the anti-Snape > viewpoint so evident in the so-called trial) Carol again: To respond to my own accidental post (I thought I was responding to Ali!) because everyone else has snipped the four charges (and yes, I know it's all in fun, but I'm responding seriously , anyway): I'm not a lawyer, but I would think that the very wording of the first charge would get Snape off on a technicality. "Abominable" and "beastly" are emotionally charged words that have no place in a court of law. Also, to my knowledge, membership in the Death Eaters was not "treasonous." I'm not even sure that the organization itself was illegal, though its activities undoubtedly were. More important, it's an open question whether the young Snape knew what the organization was about, and as of now we have insufficient evidence to indicate that he did. And as Betsy indicated, he's already been cleared of all charges relating to being a Death Eater. I don't know about Britain, much less the judicially corrupt WW, but in the U.S. at least, you can't be tried for the same crime twice. All of which pretty much disposes of charges 1 and 2. Charge number 3 is unprovable at present. If I read GoF correctly, and I realize that other readings are possible, he was not present at the graveyard scene and Voldemort believes (or believed at that time) that Snape had "left him forever." In any case, *if* he "continues as a member of that organization," it's part of his cover as a spy for Dumbledore. And if charges 1 and 2 are thrown out, wouldn't 3 be thrown out with them? Again, you can't be tried for the same crime twice. Which leaves charge number 4 and Alla's definition of assault, which may or may not correspond with the legal definition. (Assault by that definition certainly seems to be permissible at Hogwarts given the behavior of Fake!Moody, Umbridge, Filch, and others, not to mention the students mentioned by other posters.) That aside, he is not guilty of *battery.* Unlike Fake!Moody and Umbridge, he has never (to our knowledge) used a spell on a student. Nor has he ever struck a student. He threw Harry *away* from him when he was furious with Harry for violating his privacy. He could have done Harry serious bodily harm, but instead he ordered him out of his office. Yes, Harry thought that the exploding jar of cockroaches was thrown at him, but it didn't strike him and it could have exploded through accidental magic along the lines of Harry's accidental vengeance against Dudley and Aunt Marge. While Snape may or may not be guilty of *psychological* abuse, there's no evidence of lasting harm to the students (even Neville's boggart has probably changed by now), and in any case, that's not what he's charged with. So, in the absence of sufficient evidence to prove this charge, he would have to be found innocent--or the charge would have to be dropped as before. Carol, who can't attend Accio because it's at Reading University in the UK and she's stuck in Tucson but hopes that the verdict will be determined fairly and reasonably despite evidence to the contrary in the wording of the charges From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 06:06:13 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:06:13 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: <9.42ef418d.2fa15048@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128186 Potioncat wrote: > > More important than whose pensieve is it, IMO, is whose memories are in it? Harry's Dumbledores? I wouldn't think they'd be looking into someone else's memories....uh, oh...Merlin help them if it's Snape's thoughts!! The Other Cheryl responded: > Perhaps they are looking at Harry's memories of the AK at GH. Perhaps the Pensieve and HBP contain the answer to JKR's "Why did Voldemort survive?" question. What would happen to someone who wandered into the path of an AK inside someone else's memory? Carol responds: I've said this before, so forgive me for repeating, but thoughts are not stored in a Pensieve. They are placed there by a person capable of removing them from his own head--an Occlumens. We have so far seen only two people capable of performing this intricate bit of magic, Dumbledore and Snape. Snape is not present in the HBP scene, so, unless Harry has learned to become a "superb Occlumens" in the time between the end of OoP and the HBP cover scene, the thoughts or memories are almost certainly Dumbledore's. As for an AK in a memory, I'm sure it couldn't kill, any more than the people in the memory can see and react to the person who enters the memory. He is only a witness to things that have already happened and can't be changed. As the Ghost of Christmas Past tells Scrooge, "These are but the shadows of the things that have been. They have no consciousness of us." And, I would imagine, they have no power to hurt us, either, at least not physically. Carol, counting the days From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 06:21:32 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:21:32 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater In-Reply-To: <000501c54b88$f823ac10$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128187 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "JaanisE" wrote: > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve > > I am a hardcore die-hard member of the P.I.N.E club (Percy Is Not Evil), ... > > (..) > -------------------------- > > Jaanis: > > How much Percy may ignore the rules of life ..., I think it was > very rude of him to send his mother's Christmas present back. > ...edited... > Jaanis bboyminn: I don't disagree with you, though someone else offerred a reasonable explanation for Percy's actions. It has been suggested that when Percy left he was bound and determined to prove his father wrong. The only way Percy could prove that he got and could keep his job on his own merits was to cut himself off completely from his family. That way there could be no implications of favoritism in either direction, and no implications that he was spying for anyone. The only way he could assure this was to make the break between himself and his family absolute and complete. That present could have been seen as his family trying to bribe him for information about Fudge, or trying to get back in his good graces to get information on Fudge and the Ministry. Or, it could have implied to the Ministy that Percy was actually on good terms with his family, and that might have lead a paranoid Fudge to think Percy was a spy. I suspect, though partly fueled by anger, it was also very difficult for Percy to send the present back. But to prove his point, he had to be absolute; let's face it, Percy isn't exactly the most flexible guy. In any event, I'm sure Percy took some comfort in receiving the present, but to prove his point he had to send it back. Further, many people are upset about Percy not coming to visit his father in the hospital. I don't think that was easy for Percy. I'm sure that behind the scenes he monitored the situation closely. But in all honestly, even if Percy wanted to come, I don't think he believed he would be very welcome, and that probably carried the most weight in keeping him away. Only time will tell. Steve/bboyminn From bboyminn at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 06:43:34 2005 From: bboyminn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 06:43:34 -0000 Subject: Knowledge to Destroy Harry? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128188 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > > DD implies in OOP that the prophesy would tell LV how to destroy > Harry. He tells Harry that since Harry's escape in GOF, "he {LV} > has been determined to hear that prophesy in its entirety. ..." > > I don't understand this for two reasons: > > 1) To me, the prophesy (as we know it) doesn't even hint at how to > destroy Harry, unless LV is going to "hand" him to death. > bboyminn: Keep in mind that Voldemort doesn't know what the Prophecy says, he thinks it might hold some clue to Harry's downfall, and that idea may have been helped along by Spy!Snape. The Order's only concern is that Voldemort is safer spending his time chasing a worthless Prophecy, than he is if he gives it up and start open full scale war. So, the Prophecy is a diversion that has a strategic advantage to the Order. Voldemort, since he has never heard the Prophecy, doesn't know one way or the other as to whether it has valuable information. But the Prophecy is the very thing that sets his whole downfall into motion, and I'm sure he feels he would feel safer and more confident knowing what is says. We now know the Prophecy wouldn't have been much help to Voldemort, but Voldemort doesn't know that, even now the Prophecy is critically important because as I said it the heart of everything that's happening. Given what happened in the last book, and as much as he may want to know, I suspect Voldemort has given up on hearing it. > Angie continues: > > 2) It seems apparent that LV believes the AK curse will kill/destroy > Harry, since he attempts to use in on him in GOF/OOP. So what other > method of killing/destruction does the prophesy give him? > > I suppose it's possible that LV thinks the prophesy will give him > that info, but that doesn't seem to me to be what DD says or even > implies. > > Angie bboyminn: I believe Voldemort's actions were a combination of frustration and anger at Harry for having thwarted him again. In that moment of anger and while the opportunity was there, he felt compelled to take action. But as much as his own ego has convinced him that he is all powerful and superior to Harry, there has to be an element of lingering doubt in the back of his mind. He tried once to kill Harry and he failed, failed in a big way, and that is not something, no matter how deluded he is, that he can easily forget. Yes, he was trying to kill Harry, but that was driven by frustration and anger, in times of cooler temperment, I'm sure he still has his doubts. Just a thought. Steve/bboyminn From ayaneva at aol.com Thu Apr 28 00:12:34 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:12:34 -0000 Subject: Purging the DE ranks and deadly!Sirius (was Re: The boys holding the prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128189 Jim F. writes: > By the time of the MoM caper, Voldemort knew that only the > person(s) a Prophecy are about can *pick it up*; yet Lucius > and all the Death Eaters are ready to handle it once Harry > had lifted it off the shelf. It sure seems that the only > restriction is on lifting the prophecy off its resting place. > Once that's done, anybody can handle it. I've got a question about that whole scene. Sorry if this question's been asked already (if asked before, I can't rememer OR find the thread). The way Voldie had the DE's carry the whole attack thing out...it seems more like he was trying to purge his ranks like Stalin was prone to do every so often. Like, send all of the people you don't like on a suicide mission and make a half-hearted attempt to "save" them. And maybe trying to possess Harry to death was just an after thought. I mean, never pass up an opportunity, right? And there's still the question of how a bunch of kids can best a bunch of fully grown evil wizards. A bit of bad writing, or maybe the DEs were sabotaged by their Master so that their fighting skills would be compromised? Just a thought. Sorry, I know I keep asking questions that probably have no answer, but I'm just dying for a theory. AyanEva ------------------------------------------------------- In post 128165, Sherry wrote: Ok, I'm a broken record on this topic, I guess. However, recently on this list, we discussed JKR's statements about why people take the animagus forms they do. She was quoted as saying that the animagus form comes from inside the wizard, based on their personality, who they are inside. I'm paraphrasing, obviously. So, that being the case, sirius just cannot be a bad guy. Dogs are not bad. They are loyal to death. They would die to protect their pack, their family unit so to speak. They just do not betray. I've literally trusted my life and safety to dogs for the last 30 years. Nothing can ever make me believe Sirius could be bad, simply on the basis of his animagus form. AyanEva: But the Grim's a dog and it heralds death. That's not exactly good unless you have a death wish. Speaking of which, setting aside my previously mentioned dislike for Sirius, I've always wondered why JKR chose to equate him with a Grim for half the book until they found out that he was just an animagus dog? It makes my brain itch for some reason. I think it's been mentioned before that maybe it was a clue that he was going to wind up dead, but what if it meant something else? Like Harry's going to be in grave danger as direct result of something that Sirius initiated before his death? I know, it probably just sounds like I'm aching for something bad to pin on Sirius, but the thought crossed my mind long before I grew to dislike him. AyanEva From ayaneva at aol.com Thu Apr 28 00:36:55 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 00:36:55 -0000 Subject: Slytherins and Rebels (was Re: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128190 Steve/bboyminn said: > Now the tricky part, people love outlaws, and people hate rule > loving prudes. There is an old country and western song that > goes, 'Ladies love outlaws like babies love stray dogs, and > ladies take to outlaws like a banker takes to gold...'. If you > don't think that's true then explain why so many fans are > enamored with Draco and why so many fans are drawn to Slytherin > house? AyanEva: Oh, here I go with thread offshoots again...Sorry, this is another thing that I worked out when I was half asleep last night (right along with the Van Gogh bit), Steve just reminded me of it. I wouldn't say that all Slytherin/Draco fans are fans because they like rebels. Take me, for instance. I can't believe that an entire house can be bad. Even if we never see it, there has to be at least one decent kid in there. That ALL Slytherins would be bad, just wouldn't make any sense. So, I kind of root for Slytherin for a couple of reasons. 1) As long as there's the possibilty of one good Slytherin kid, I can't give up on the entire house. If I were actually at Hogwarts, dismissing the whole of Slytherin as bad would only serve to alienate all Slytherins, INCLUDING the one good kid and I'd lose my chance at making inroads to form any sort of less contentious relationship. I think this may have already happened and that's partly why Snape overcompensates by favoring his house. I need that one kid and I'm gonna find him because he could be the difference between the Slytherins all going bad or at least some of them making the right decision and going good. If I'm fighting Voldie, I need bodies and I don't particularly care what house they're from. 2) The second reason kind of ties into the first. I feel bad for the Slytherins. Half of them, with slightly maniacal parents, already got short changed growing up. Now they get to school, only to get the short end of the stick for the second time as a result of my first point. So, while I don't agree with most of the Slytherin philosophy, I do feel some empathy for them because it's really all they know and it only gets reinforced by how others treat them. They're not really granted the opportunity to grow and change because they're typecast as soon as they get to Hogwarts. 3) I like Draco because, once again, I feel bad for him because of reason number two. I think if someone moves now, it might not be too late to steer him to the good side. It's sad because I don't think anyone will make any sort of effort. It's always, "Slytherins are bad and that's that." When it should be, "Everyone has the potential to do good, I should at least make an effort to sway a few folks." The move really should've been made before his father was jailed. Like, since his first year at Hogwarts. Same for all of the Slytherin students. So, for me it's not really the rebel thing at all. It's a sense that things are slightly out of kilter and it's partly the fault of Wizarding society. It's just me hanging on to my little desire for things to change, just a bit. AyanEva From cat_kind at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 08:46:45 2005 From: cat_kind at yahoo.com (cat_kind) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 08:46:45 -0000 Subject: End of book seven - what happens? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128191 > bboyminn: > Although highly unlikely, one such scenario would be for Harry to > somehow cause Voldemort to lose all his magic powers. This would be > fate worse than death. Voldemort with his many protections against > death would be force to live out his long long miserably long long > life as a powerless helpless muggle. Now that is certaily a fate worse > than death for someone like Voldemort. > > Another, is for Harry in a self-sacrificial act to pull Voldemort > throught The Veil. That, in my opinion would be Harry causing > Voldemort's death without actually murdering him, and would also be a > very heroic act. catkind: I really like the theory about LV losing his magic. But why not combine the two? Harry sacrifices his own magic in order to take away LV's magic. It would be in tune with the idea of their link. It would give the series a good sense of closure - we would have the whole history of Harry's life as a wizard. It would be a fate worse than death for LV, but not for Harry, and would leave Harry in the position of making a new start in a new world rather than being either dead or hideously famous as the Boy Who Saved the Universe. (Can ex-wizards ride brooms?) Personally, I'm sceptical about the Veil being the solution, that's been "done" in Book 5, so I don't think it will become hugely important again. The Room, I agree, must be there for something, though it might be a bit too simple a solution if all we have to do is lure LV in. Pure speculation. catkind From Weiss145 at aol.com Thu Apr 28 03:20:21 2005 From: Weiss145 at aol.com (Weiss145 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2005 23:20:21 EDT Subject: Percy Weasley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128192 Jaanis: > How much Percy may ignore the rules of life (as you called it), I think it was very rude of him to send his mother's Christmas present back. I don't belive Percy is evil or on the side of Voldemort too, I'm merely watching him in the books without making any judgement (which could prove wrong later on). Still I was very surprised (unpleasantly, of course) by his reaction, it would be quite an obstacle to redeeming himself. < Elle: We don't know what the last conversation Molly and Percy had. Molly may have very well yelled at Percy so much that he finally slammed the door in her face. We all know that Molly has a tendency to rant and she may have said some nasty things to him. After that conversation, why would Percy want any present from her? He also may have resented the insinuation that nothing has changed. Even though everyone has turned their back on him, they still want to send him a sweater. He doesn't want a sweater, he wants them to see reason. The present may also have symbolized that Molly wants him to come home and by sending it back, he shows he still wants his independence. He is still angry. Why shouldn't he be? By accepting the gift, he was backing down and Percy thought he was in the right. He also may have sent it back in a moment of anger, or not wanted it around as a reminder of how much he missed his family. There are many reasons to explain why he did not accept the present. From asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 09:34:53 2005 From: asian_lovr2 at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 09:34:53 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley: Ministry Scape-Goat In-Reply-To: <20010603223116.80902.qmail@web14703.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128193 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, tara scarbro wrote: > > Milz, I feel that Percy was relied on by Crouch Sr. > because he was a new employee and would not ask any > questions about responsibilities given to him by > Crouch Sr. due to his admiration of Crouch Sr. and > simply doing as he is told . Others such as Barty or > Mr. Weasley would have likely began questioning Crouch > Sr.'s absences. > > sneakoscope2001 bboyminn: I have a problem believing Percy will get blamed for the Crouch Fiasco. It seems that that investigation has already been concluded. Also, let's not forget that Percy was Crouch's Personal Assistant, that makes his duties very much different from the rest of the staff working for Crouch. It is certainly fair to wonder and ask, why when Mr. Crouch fell ill, he didn't give some senior member of the staff the job of looking after things. But being a personal assistant means that with Crouch gone Percy has nothing to do, and the logical extension of that is that all the remaining more senior staff have more things to do. Consequently, Percy, the guy with nothing to do, was given the task, like judging the Tri-Wiz Tournement, that would have pulled the other staff away from the real work that needed to be done. Also, I suspect all Percy really did when he was at the office was sit behind a big desk dreaming about how important he was, and getting tea and filing papers for everyone else. Though, I'm sure he generated a report or two that he felt was terribly important. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure Percy did have some administrative duties, but I don't think he was as grand and important as he made himself out to be. Further, I think Percy's self-important belief was re-enforced by his getting the high-profile Tournement duties. So, I guess what I'm saying is, in reality, I don't think Percy was in a high enough position with enough true responsibility to be held at fault for anything. Certainly more senior members of the staff, those who knew Crouch well and worked with him for years, should have been the ones to raise the alarm or express concern. Percy getting blamed is a great theory, and a nice twist to the plot, and while it is fun speculation, I personally don't see Percy in a position that allows the blame to be put on him. Especially, not now when Fudge is being thrown out, and a more (hopefully) Dumbledore friendly Minster is coming in. I could actually see Fudge trying something like that, but Fudge's days are number, he's in total disgrace, and has likely lost all power and support. Any new Minister worth his salt is going to know there are more important things to deal with than the 'old news' case of Barty Crouch Sr. Just a few thoughts. Steve/bboyminn From finwitch at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 10:33:09 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:33:09 -0000 Subject: "Bad" Sirius (was Re: Prophecy wording) In-Reply-To: <426F0F0D.9050804@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128194 > > Kathy writes: -- I just wondered why Bellatrix would call him "the animagus, Black". Pettigrew might have told V that Black was an animagus, but that doesn't explain why Bellatrix would not refer > to him as "Black, Harry's Godfather" or "Black, her cousin", > (which should have come to mind more quickly than the animagus) or even "that mudblood lover, Black?" It Just seems odd to me. Finwitch: Well -- I think it has to do with Regulus Black. Being Sirius' brother, he's just as much Bellatrix' cousin as Sirius is. Since Regulus also wished to back off, well... I don't know if it's all that different. Besides, I don't think Bellatrix would want to emphasize being a relative to someone who so actively defied Voldemort. As for that godfather-business -- not so sure if Bellatrix had heard of that -- or if it meant anything. She's using 'animagus' as a title - to brag about fighting someone with enough cunning, resources and power to become an animagus without help or knowledge at such young age... You want to brag about defeating someone so powerful, but can't show any kind emotion. Animagus Black. (remember what S said about his parents/brother believing that to be a Black made you practically a royal...) Finwitch From jaanise at hello.lv Thu Apr 28 12:40:12 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:40:12 +0300 Subject: =?us-ascii?Q?RE:_=5BHPforGrownups=5D_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort's_PO?= =?us-ascii?Q?V_=28long=29?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000e01c54bef$6bd475c0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128195 -----Original Message----- From: Neri So maybe Voldemort's experiments were about binding his death to people. This can be a way to avoid death: bind your death to a certain person, so he's the only one who can kill you, then make sure he can't kill you. Perhaps these bindings were limited in time. Voldy needed to find out how to bind his death to a person for good, so that once he kills this person, he can't die anymore. And perhaps he found that the only way to do it is to bind his death to a certain unknown person. Perhaps only to a yet unborn person. --------------------------- Jaanis: This is a nice theory. To bind his death to people. Or maybe he can bind his *life* to people? Like - while the bind person lives, Voldemort cannot be killed, he lives too. Adn when this other person becomes too old, Voldemort binds his life to another person. Of course, the best choice here would be a baby (maybe?), so he wouldn't have to worry too much for some period of time. But what if something happens to the other person? Like a disease or an accident? Maybe Voldemort can bind his life to more than one person at a time? Or maybe the spell works in both ways: while the bound person lives, Voldemort lives (cannot die), and while Voldemort lives, the bound person lives too (cannot die) and thus secures the spell so that Voldemort cannot die? From hubbada at unisa.ac.za Thu Apr 28 12:48:00 2005 From: hubbada at unisa.ac.za (deborahhbbrd) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:48:00 -0000 Subject: Percy and the family row : characterisation matters Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128196 Percy did not accept his mother's Christmas present, so Percy is on the side of Darkness? Hmm ? let's think this over. Percy is not a well rounded character, but what we see of him indicates that he is self-important and insists on recognition. Nobody else rushes around Hogwarts shouting that he's a prefect, or Head Boy. We don't even know who the head prefects, or any prefects, were in Harry's first and second years, except Percy and Penelope, and if our Perce hadn't been her boyfriend we would never have heard of her either. This is what we see. What Ron says about Percy's ambition and lack of a sense of humour isn't really evidence. We also see him praised and favoured by his parents, who use him to discipline their other children. This naturally backfires, and it is possible that he might think that if he hadn't been presented as a model son, Ron and especially the twins might have given him an easier life. Or not ? after all, he wants to be a model son. When he leaves school and starts his career as an independent adult, he loses Head Boy status and gains nothing but a job as a minor civil servant, for which he gets teased by his brothers as if he was still a mere schoolboy. Wouldn't it be a temptation to leave home, and allow his fragile ego some time to feel good about itself? And wouldn't the family row be an excellent opportunity to do this? Rather surf out on a wave of righteous indignation than hurt your mother's feelings by telling her out of the blue that home isn't good enough any more. And now, think about the sweater. Who knows what colour code Molly would use for "sweater, remote-control knitted, minor bureaucrat third son, for the use of"? And would it have his initial in the middle of the chest, like Superman? Percy has already hurt his parents, and he knows that, but his pride will not allow him to apologise or explain, especially since he believes he is in the right. (Similarly, though with more justice, Arthur and Molly can't apologise to him because they know they're in the right. Of such are family feuds made.) Isn't this the perfect reason to return that ghastly, embarrassing sweater? Now he's earning, he can choose his own clothes anyway, no doubt pinstriped, and "enjoy" the visible signs of a clean break with the past. Which is why I wouldn't be surprised to see, at some point in HBP or Book 7, Percy in the kitchen at The Burrow, helping with the cleaning, sleeves of his Christmas sweater determinedly rolled up ... . I don't know how the cycle of hurt, distrust and guilt will be broken, but he is a Weasley after all, and I'm sure it will. And if he's really lucky, Penny will be handing him the mop and bucket! From willsonkmom at msn.com Thu Apr 28 13:18:58 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:18:58 -0000 Subject: Percy and the family row : characterisation matters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128197 Deborrah wrote: snip > > Which is why I wouldn't be surprised to see, at some point in HBP or > Book 7, Percy in the kitchen at The Burrow, helping with the cleaning, > sleeves of his Christmas sweater determinedly rolled up ... . I don't > know how the cycle of hurt, distrust and guilt will be broken, but he > is a Weasley after all, and I'm sure it will. And if he's really > lucky, Penny will be handing him the mop and bucket! Potioncat: You know, this is how a family row does settle out in a loving family; and for all the criticism the Weasleys get, they are a loving family. Doh, I never thought about Percy's girlfriend's name being "Penny". Pretty interesting, actually, IIRC, Percy was as embarrassed about finances as Ron was. I don't think Penny is missing. (Another thread, I know) Simply, there was no reason for Harry to run into her. Potioncat From oppen at mycns.net Thu Apr 28 13:29:41 2005 From: oppen at mycns.net (ravenclaw001) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:29:41 -0000 Subject: Hermione and her parents Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128198 One thing that AFAIK hasn't been brought up is that Hermione's parents may be so jammed-up with something or other that they don't have time for their daughter. Those of you who've read _Pet Semetary_ would remember how the protagonist's wife had, in her childhood, had a sister whose horrific health problems consumed a great deal of her parents' time and attention. This could account for Hermione's missing sister---if she's got this sister, but the sister's got major, life-threatening problems with her health, the Doctors Granger could well leave Hermione very much to her own devices merely because they're so consumed with their sick child. Or---I don't know if such an organization exists, but if there's something like _Medicins sans Frontiers_ for dentists, Hermione's parents may be spending months at a time in the Third World, tending to people's teeth, and could even not _notice_ that they're not getting letters because the post is so bad anyway. Of course, they could be cold, self-absorbed social climbers of the same sort as the way a lot of fanficcers depict Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy, who have important cocktail parties, important social schmoozing, and important trysts with other people's spouses taking priority. --Eric Oppen, Ravenclaw-manque From oppen at mycns.net Thu Apr 28 13:31:41 2005 From: oppen at mycns.net (ravenclaw001) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:31:41 -0000 Subject: The Final Confrontation Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128199 I have no problem with Harry killing Lord Thingy. However, I do have a problem with Harry killing the Big V _just like that._ I want to see Lord V _suffer_ first. --Eric Oppen, Ravenclaw-manque, whose own father called him "the perfect medieval man," only to be nonplussed when Eric, being in the SCA, was quite pleased at the compliment. From jaanise at hello.lv Thu Apr 28 14:29:18 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:29:18 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy and the family row : characterisation matters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54bfe$a9ec01c0$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128200 -----Original Message----- From: deborahhbbrd Percy did not accept his mother's Christmas present, so Percy is on the side of Darkness? Hmm - let's think this over. -------------------------- Jaanis: No need to turn my post upside-down, Deborah! I specifically noted that I don't think Persy is on the side of Darkness. From ajroald at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 14:59:13 2005 From: ajroald at yahoo.com (Lea) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 14:59:13 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128201 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > > Potioncat: > Well, this is a good question. But I think the explanation is more > literary than realistic. For the plot to work, the kids have to be on > their own. To a certain extent, adults have to fail. This is true > when you wonder where the heck the teachers were in SS/PS when H/R/H > went after the stone. > > To be honest, it was several readings into the books before I thought > to wonder why the Weasleys or the Grangers could just send their kids > off for ten months and think no more about it. It just has to be. > Might as well wonder how a broom can fly. > > Potioncat: BTW, how does a broom fly? (I've seen a horse fly, but > I've never seen a broom fly.) Geoff_bannister in post 128145 made an excellent point that, to those of us who reside in the states, wouldn't necessarily realize. While we (Americans) tend to coddle (and I don't mean that in a bad way, we just do) our children, the British don't necessarily. They are accustomed to sending their children off to bording schools, and think of them as 'ready to handle' their own life problems while there. So it's not that the any of the parents who send their children off to Hogwarts are bad parents, that is just what is culturally accepted. IMO, the WW is also something that the Grangers can not relate to, and just the mere thought of it may freak them out. Therefore, Hermione simply doesn't elaborate on it. It probably isn't a topic of conversation over dinner during holiday breaks. Just a thought ~ Lea From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 15:31:19 2005 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:31:19 -0000 Subject: End of book seven - what happens? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128202 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cat_kind" wrote: >> Personally, I'm sceptical about the Veil being the solution, that's > been "done" in Book 5, so I don't think it will become hugely > important again. The Room, I agree, must be there for something, > though it might be a bit too simple a solution if all we have to do > is > lure LV in. > Pure speculation. There is a theory about the "2 book rule," which says that an important magic or person is introduced 2 books before it becomes absolutely huge. (Good editorial at Mugglenet recapped and expanded upon here: (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/editorials/edit- utley01.shtml) First Book --> 2 Books Later. PS/SS: SB's motorcycle. --> PoA: Sirius is the PoA. PS/SS: Animagi + McGonagall's cat transformation --> PoA: Sirius is Padfoot and 4 Marauders. CoS: Riddle returns. --> GoF: Voldy returns. CoS: Tom Riddle's Hogwarts years. --> GoF: The Riddle House and LV returns via bone of his father. CoS: The trio make Polyjuice Potion. --> GoF: Crouch Jr!Moody uses PP. CoS: The Ford Anglia was bigger inside than outside to get them all to the station. --> GoF: QC Tents and CrouchJr.!Moody's trunk that were bigger inside than out. PoA: Fudge's leniency about the restriction of underage magic --> OotP: Fudge's zealotry and the trial for underage magic PoA: prison system, trials, MoM --> Bureaucracy, the trial, and the battle at the MoM. PoA: Trelawney makes a prophecy. --> OotP: Trelawney's first prophacy. PoA: Sirius flies off. --> OotP: Sirius is off'ed. Which leads us to: GoF --> HBP: The international wizarding world via the Quiddich Cup and the TriWizard Tourney. Beauxbatons and Durmstrung. Portkeys. Death Eaters ("The One who has left us") and the Dark Mark. Brother wands. Victor Krum. Veela. Leprechans. Harry gives Gred and Forge his Triwizard winnings for a joke shop. OotP --> Book 7: Disillusionment Charm, Scourgify, Vanishing spell. Tonks and metamorphmagi. Writing something in one's own blood until it "has left an impression." (Blood magic? Charms that are sealed by blood?) The Room of Requirement. The MoM, including aurors, chimeric beasts, and the DoM rooms concerning Time, the Power to rule them all (Love? Honor?), The Veil, and the Planets. St. Mungo's, the Longbottoms, and the Drooble's best chewing gum wrappers. Those stupid 2-way mirrors that Harry didn't open and use. The DA. Occlumens and Legilimens. OWLs and NEWTs. Also, it seems to me that an odd/even rule applies: Odd books are fundamentally about Harry's secrets and mysteries. Even books are fundamentally about Voldy's secrets and mysteries. To whit: 1) PS/SS: Harry leaves muggledom for Hogwarts. Learns about his true nature as a wizard. (The secret of HP's birth.) 2) CoS: LV's childhood as Tom Riddle. (The secret of LV's birth.) 3) PoA: Harry's dad was one of the Marauders. (HP's dad and Sirius.) 4) GoF: LV's rebirthing ceremony. (LV's dad's arm was used.) 5) OotP: Harry's Prophacy. (Harry's fate. Predestination vs. choice.) Therefore: 6) HBP: About Voldy. (Voldy's fate?) 7) About Harry. (?) Anything else? TK -- TigerPatronus From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 15:35:34 2005 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 15:35:34 -0000 Subject: The Final Confrontation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128203 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ravenclaw001" wrote: > I want to see Lord V _suffer_ first. TK: Or afterward. See the other thread about how maybe HP and LV won't actually die, but HP might sacrifice his *magic* to destroy LV's magic. Thus. Lord Thingy lives out his days as muggle, being muggly, doing mugglicious things. Heh, heh, heh. TK -- TigerPatronus From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 17:19:41 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:19:41 -0000 Subject: Power the Dark Lord Knows Not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128204 jen: > But, I do think Harry has another power. We're still waiting on the > mystery of his eyes to be revealed. That's an issue we've heard > about for five books with little or no explanation, so it must be > something big. And are his eyes connected to his ability to do > wandless magic? Even if they are though, we found out in the duel > between Voldemort and Dumbledore that Harry's magical skills are not > equal to Voldemort's. Even if he has a certain magical power > Voldemort knows not, there's still the issue that he repelled > Voldemort from possessing him out of his love for Sirius. > > Harry also has an ability to unite people against Voldemort, and > call to him the people and objects he needs in the moment he is on > the verge of being defeated by Voldemort. Call it luck, call it > careful plotting by JKR ;), but it could also be a power he > possesses, perhaps even connected to the mystery of his eyes. In > moments of desperation Harry finds what he needs, four times now. It > may be other people or creatures coming to his aid, but still, it's > uncanny. > Chys: I was thinking that was obvious- the other power involving eyes, he can do the same thing that LV does, that legilimency thing, naturally. He just can't control or understand it, from what I have read, from what I understand of it. He sort of gleans things from people when he looks at them, doesn't he? (Like his looking at DD and such in book 5, yes he's connected to LV but that's different.) And he's been getting it from LV all this time, right back to day one with Quirrel's turban in his dreams- so why not his ability be just like LVs but not as mature? The occlumency thing is like backwards in that respect, he's the opposite, so maybe that aside from the obvious problems in class of a teacher who doesn't help him along and his neglecting practice, could be the problem for his inability to use it. The summons and uniting people like Fawkes comes to him and others helping him has already been explained by DD, it was his faith in others, it seems. (or in his own ability- accio broom, triwizard tourney?) Wandless magic I think is just something that's not expanded upon enough, it happens during times of great emotion, so if you're in danger you're obviously gonna have great emotion. I think they just forget about it since it's not promoted in class. You use your wand, so that's the way they learn the magic. I think it's more wild and harder to control, since it's random. Chys From tinglinger at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 17:23:36 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:23:36 -0000 Subject: 2 book rule In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128205 tigerpatronus There is a theory about the "2 book rule," which says that an important magic or person is introduced 2 books before it becomes absolutely huge. GoF --> HBP: The international wizarding world via the Quiddich Cup and the TriWizard Tourney. Beauxbatons and Durmstrung. Portkeys. Death Eaters ("The One who has left us") and the Dark Mark. Brother wands. Victor Krum. Veela. Leprechans. Harry gives Gred and Forge his Triwizard winnings for a joke shop. tinglinger Interesting ............ If this rule is valid, then in addition to the above, the Lovegoods {and unfortunately, Goyle Sr.) are also first mentioned in GOF. I have posted about the role of Luna and her dad extensively both here and in my potterplots yahoogroup. In particular, Luna's dad will be killed by Goyle Sr. as one of the first, if not the first victim of the Second War, and Luna will play an important role in Harry's life during HBP. This scenario is now even more probable if the 2 Book rule is valid. tinglinger gathering clues and conjectures till HBP is released in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 19:01:58 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:01:58 -0000 Subject: Knowledge to Destroy Harry? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128206 Angie wrote: > > DD implies in OOP that the prophesy would tell LV how to destroy > > Harry. He tells Harry that since Harry's escape in GOF, "he {LV} > > has been determined to hear that prophesy in its entirety. ..." > > > > I don't understand this for two reasons: > > > > 1) To me, the prophesy (as we know it) doesn't even hint at how to > > destroy Harry, unless LV is going to "hand" him to death. > > > > bboyminn replied: > > > We now know the Prophecy wouldn't have been much help to Voldemort, > but Voldemort doesn't know that, even now the Prophecy is critically > important because as I said it the heart of everything that's > happening. Given what happened in the last book, and as much as he may > want to know, I suspect Voldemort has given up on hearing it. > Angie again: Hmmm. I can't believe he would stop trying to hear it if there was a way, which makes me wonder whether LV knows who made the prophecy (he would know if the spy knew who Trelawney was). LV could go after Trelawney, but it appears that she doesn't "recall" what she has prophesied. I don't think DD is simply keeping her at HG for her protection, though. I think he suspects/wonders/worries that she may have another prophesy in her. After all, three is a nice, round number. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 19:08:32 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:08:32 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_The_Prophecy_From_Voldemort=92s_POV_(long)?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128207 "nkafkafi" wrote: > Lets look at the prophecy from Voldy's POV. Try to > forget for a moment that you know the second half, and look only at > the part that HE knows: > > "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... born > to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies..." > Angie replies: It just occured to me as I read your post: How could LV think he was "fulfulling" this prophesy, when it didn't require him to DO anything? He had nothing to do with the "one" who was approaching. Am I being too simplistic or hyper-technical? From nrenka at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 19:29:13 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:29:13 -0000 Subject: Purging the DE ranks and deadly!Sirius (was Re: The boys holding the prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128208 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AyanEva" wrote: > AyanEva: > > And there's still the question of how a bunch of kids can best a > bunch of fully grown evil wizards. A bit of bad writing, or maybe > the DEs were sabotaged by their Master so that their fighting > skills would be compromised? Just a thought. Sorry, I know I keep > asking questions that probably have no answer, but I'm just dying > for a theory. Well, they are trying to avoid smashing the shiny as much as possible- -which causes some restraint. It has also been postulated that casting things like Killing Curses is rather exhausting, and not their top priority at the moment. In addition, remember that sheer individual competence is really not necessary to run an effective reign of terror. I think we all underestimate the DEs in some areas and overestimate them in others. > In post 128165, Sherry wrote: > > Ok, I'm a broken record on this topic, I guess. However, recently > on this list, we discussed JKR's statements about why people take > the animagus forms they do. She was quoted as saying that the > animagus form comes from inside the wizard, based on their > personality, who they are inside. > AyanEva: > > But the Grim's a dog and it heralds death. That's not exactly good > unless you have a death wish. Speaking of which, setting aside my > previously mentioned dislike for Sirius, I've always wondered why > JKR chose to equate him with a Grim for half the book until they > found out that he was just an animagus dog? (Well, there is the more obvious point that the narrative structure of PoA absolutely hinges on things in plain sight being misinterpreted, leading to a resolution that hinges on reversal...) To go more than slightly meta on you all, I finally remembered where to find what I remember--it's on JKR's site, when commenting upon cats vs. dogs: "I am not overly fond of cats. Like Hagrid, I am allergic to them and much prefer dogs." Let's keep playing the meta game and assume that JKR's assignation of animagus forms to people not only tells us something about who they are in the story, but also thus about *what she thinks* about that character. She's a dog lover, as attested to further elsewhere. Would she make a character objectively evil and assign them the form of one of her favorite animals? I don't think so. (Of course, her pegging of Lupin as a favorite character has been interpreted as not telling us that he's not evil, so anything can fly.) That is, of course, separate from individual feelings about characters, which are completely up to anyone. But if you're looking for more concrete and less subjective things to pin on someone, it's always good to keep the author's orientation in mind when guessing whether things will be made manifest in the text or not. -Nora herself expects Rowling's comments about various characters to be made rather manifest in textual events From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 23:01:01 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:01:01 -0000 Subject: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? In-Reply-To: <1d7.3b791ce9.2fa19866@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128209 --- > > Angie: > > I understand that LV didn't hear all of the prophesy, but I don't > > understand how he was "mistaken" -- didn't he fulfull the first part > > of the prophesy re marking Harry as his equal (assuming the marking is > > the attempt to kill Harry)? > > Cheryl: I think the point DD was making is that if he'd done NOTHING, if he'd > not attacked either boy, neither of them would have been 'marked', he'd have > won and he'd have not spent 15 or so years floating around as vapormort. > > Angie: I'm sorry -- perhaps I'm being obtuse, but how would he have "won" if he had not attacked or marked either boy? > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 23:21:56 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:21:56 -0000 Subject: Exclusivity of the Prophecy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128210 "And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives." If Harry is the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord, does this necessarily mean that only Harry can kill Voldemort? Does this mean that only Voldemort can kill Harry? Could it simply mean that Voldemort will hound Harry until Harry kills Voldemort or vice versa? It doesn't seem that Voldemort believes that only Harry can kill him. In OOP, at the MOM, he asked, "You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?" but he still used a shield to deflect DD's spell. Angie From gelite67 at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 23:28:12 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 23:28:12 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128211 O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort at the MOM in OOP? I know he told LV, "There are worse things than death." But, so what? It seems to me that, if LV is the most evil wizard in recent history, DD would have at least tried to kill him. He didn't try to kill LV b/c he believes there are worse things than death? What kind of justification is that for the persons LV will torture or kill after his escape from the MOM???? Why wouldn't DD try to spare the WW (and the Muggle world for that matter) any further death/destruction caused by LV? (Obviously, I don't believe the prophesy means that only Harry (or whomever "the one" is), can kill Voldemort.) Angie From jaanise at hello.lv Fri Apr 29 00:00:42 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:00:42 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c54c4e$7dd35890$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128212 -----Original Message----- From: Angie O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort at the MOM in OOP? -------------------------- Jaanis: Well, not opposing to your belief that Harry is not the only one who can kill Voldemort (theoretically, in specific conditions, as he could *not* kill/neutralize him in the MoM scene obviously) I would say that Dumbledore just couldn't kill Voldemort at that time and place. And possibly he understood that and so - didn't even try, as that might have caused some other problems maybe. We should remember that Voldemort was not killed by the ultimate death curse performed by the strongest Dark Arts specialist in our time - Voldemort himself. So, probably the way to do it is not clear yet even to Dumbledore, or it could not be done in those specific conditions (place, time, available resources etc.). From Meliss9900 at aol.com Fri Apr 29 00:12:01 2005 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 20:12:01 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM Message-ID: <13e.1248380c.2fa2d5d1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128213 In a message dated 4/28/2005 6:31:00 PM Central Standard Time, gelite67 at yahoo.com writes: O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort at the MOM in OOP? I know he told LV, "There are worse things than death." But, so what? It seems to me that, if LV is the most evil wizard in recent history, DD would have at least tried to kill him. He didn't try to kill LV b/c he believes there are worse things than death? What kind of justification is that for the persons LV will torture or kill after his escape from the MOM???? Why wouldn't DD try to spare the WW (and the Muggle world for that matter) any further death/destruction caused by LV? (Obviously, I don't believe the prophesy means that only Harry (or whomever "the one" is), can kill Voldemort.) Angie Because (regardless of the various theories that we in the fandom hatch) Dumbledore believes in the prophecy and he apparently believes that only Harry can vanquish Voldemort. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 00:18:57 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 00:18:57 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128214 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > He didn't try to kill LV b/c he believes there are worse things than > death? What kind of justification is that for the persons LV will > torture or kill after his escape from the MOM???? > > Why wouldn't DD try to spare the WW (and the Muggle world for that > matter) any further death/destruction caused by LV? GEO: Because no doubt Dumbledore knows that Voldemort's immortality is still intact and any successful attempt at destroying the Dark Lord's body would still leave his malignant spriti intact to return again and the White Wizard probably wishes a more permanent solution to the Voldemort problem. From WNCMegs at aol.com Thu Apr 28 13:30:16 2005 From: WNCMegs at aol.com (Megan) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 13:30:16 -0000 Subject: Ancient Prophecies: A Brief Intro (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128215 There is a lot of talk going on about the Prophecy and WHAT DOES IT MEAN? So I decided to look up information about the Oracle at Delphi and about the prophecies that occurred there and see if it will help us decipher Jo. Delphi was the center of the Grecian "spiritual life." Commoners, Kings and everyone in between traveled to Delphi speak and advice them on said problem. They HAD to consult the oracle on even the tiniest of matters of risk offending the Gods. For the Prophecy to happen, the priestess would enter a small chamber and sit on a 3-tiered stand above a pit. She would then fall into a trance (they have found an ancient fault line below the temple that spews gasses) and makes the Prophecy. A priest then reads it aloud with no inflections and writes it down, with NO PUNCUATION, and hands it to the recipient. It is then up to the recipient to infer what he/she wants from the words. When I went to Delphi last summer, I remember the tour guide also mention "The Speaking Waters". The priestess would also drink from water from the ground before making Prophecies. Here is an example from a website I found talking about prophecies and the Oracle at Delphi: "`You will go you will return not in the battle you will perish' was an example of this duality of meaning. The above sentence can be interpreted two different ways depending where the comma can be placed. If a comma is placed after the word `not' the message is discouraging for him who is about to depart for war. If on the other hand the comma is placed before the word `not', then the warrior is to return alive." However the recipient read into it was the meaning of the Prophecy. Look at the story of Oedipus, if he would have stayed where he was, he would have never killed his father and married his mother. He did not have all the facts, just as LV did not. He made a judgment call from the knowledge he had and believed the course of action he followed to be correct. You would dare NEVER to oracle and therefore the gods. Jo probably did a little research on this and thus meant to trick us on purpose. On another note, Sybil was the name given to many priestesses at Delphi. Here is an interesting quote in the ancient Sybils that might (or might not- I am wrong a lot) give us insight into our own WW Sybil: 'The Sibyl, with frenzied mouth uttering things not to be laughed at, unadorned and unperfumed, yet reaches to a thousand years with her voice by aid of the god.' (Heraclitus, fragment 12) Either way Jo wrote the Prophecy to be, LV made a choice with the knowledge he had. Had he heard the whole thing and if we have heard the whole thing is not necessarily the issue: LV and many of us have made a call on what we think it means. Now all we can do is wait and see how Book 6 and 7 pans out. Here are the links to the quotes within the post: 1) http://www.ancient-greece.org/history/delphi.html 2)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sibyl *Megan goes back to Drinking her glass of water and hopes for another trance-like state* ADMIN NOTE: When responding to this post, please remember that all posts to this list must discuss the HP canon. If you're responding just to discuss the Oracle at Delphi, please post it to our sister list, HPFGU-OTChatter (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter) Thanks! From shalimar07 at aol.com Thu Apr 28 14:47:50 2005 From: shalimar07 at aol.com (mumweasley7) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 14:47:50 -0000 Subject: The boys holding the prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128216 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jim Ferer" wrote: > By the time of the MoM caper, Voldemort knew that only the person (s) a > Prophecy are about can *pick it up*; yet Lucius and all the Death > Eaters are ready to handle it once Harry had lifted it off the shelf. > It sure seems that the only restriction is on lifting the prophecy > off its resting place. Once that's done, anybody can handle it. Jim, If only the people that were allowed to touch the prophecy were the ones it was written about why did Lucious Malfoy ask them to hand it to him. I think people should be wondering what bigger role Lucious plays in this story. Mum Weasley From parisfan_ca at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 15:26:36 2005 From: parisfan_ca at yahoo.com (laurie goudge) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 08:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Subject: marrage in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050428152636.14536.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128217 morning all-- This is a silly question really but--does anyone know what part of MOM would license marriage? I began wondering it when I was re-reading OOTP again and was going over when Harry and MR. Weasley were at the DOM. I know it's probably just an aside in the bigger picture of the Harry Potter universe but it was one of those things that I was curious to know. I was also wondering if the marriage would be defined as a civil union seeing as there is no defined religion in Potterverse or what? thanks for letting me ponder! Laurie __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in Thu Apr 28 16:25:03 2005 From: crownless_aragorn at yahoo.co.in (Subhash Sane) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:25:03 +0100 (BST) Subject: Percy Weasley Theory Extention Message-ID: <20050428162503.34412.qmail@web8507.mail.in.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128218 There is something more which I would like to say in detail regarding my theory on Percy Weasley - A Death Eater. It doesn't matter whether Percy is good guy or bad guy. It doesn't matter whether Percy is working for Dumbledore or not. He is very very important person from Voldemort's point of view.Voldemort will not kill Percy Weasley because he is an important person. Lucius Malfoy has seen Percy acting against his father. Voldemort is in search of 'new talent'. Naturally, Lucius must have told him about Percy's position. At the end of OOTP, Percy has not come back. He hasn't fully recovered. So, this is the right time to set a trap and get Percy. Voldemort's modus operandi is very similar to muggle terrorists. They are excellent talent hunters. They attack the brains of those who don't have anywhere to go. Feeble,weak minds always get intimidated. Still, if that person refuses to join in, they set an emotional trap wherein all other people don't believe him and they desert him completely. Thus, these minds become more feeble having lost the support of their loved ones. And at that point, these terrorist groups give them 'refuge' and 'sympathy'. So, such people become terrorists. This is how terrorists operate and this is how Voldemort operates. Hence, there will be a trap set by Lord. Again, it doesn't matter whether Percy is good or bad. If Lord wants him so badly on their side, he will do anything for it.Voldemort will not kill Percy, that's for sure. Even if we assume that Percy is acting for Dumbledore, Voldemort would still set the trap. After all, people can be forced to join, emotionally or physically. Subhash Sane, who supports Tom Riddle's claim that Galileo was wrong and the Earth revolves around Tom Riddle only. Yahoo! India Matrimony: Find your life partneronline. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mryburge at yahoo.com Thu Apr 28 19:14:18 2005 From: mryburge at yahoo.com (mryburge) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 19:14:18 -0000 Subject: Unconcerned parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128219 Potioncat: > > Well, this is a good question. But I think the explanation is more > > literary than realistic. For the plot to work, the kids have to be > on > > their own. To a certain extent, adults have to fail. This is true > > when you wonder where the heck the teachers were in SS/PS when > H/R/H > > went after the stone. Or maybe the Grangers know more about what is going on than we think...maybe they know of Hermione's importance in the whole grand scheme of things to come...and know they have to let her do what she is going to have to do alongside Hary Potter. I thought JKR made a point to tell us that the Grangers were with Hermione in Diagon Alley at the beginning of the 2nd book, which indicates they have at least a passing familiarity/knowledge of the whole wizarding world. MaryB From hambtty at triad.rr.com Thu Apr 28 21:38:39 2005 From: hambtty at triad.rr.com (B.G.) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:38:39 -0000 Subject: His Mother's Eyes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128220 "His mother's eyes" still has me facinated. I keep thinking about the possible ways JKR is going with this bit of information. Lily did not have to die? Why, because LV was going to spare her - no way! Lily was able to conjure or call whatever she needed to save herself with or without a wand. She had the power to save herself or Harry and she chose Harry. Love and sacrifice - powerful engery! Harry has the same ability as his mother and it must have something to do with the eyes. Before knowing he was a wizard think of all those times when he felt truely threatened then suddenly he "found himself" out of reach. Then Hagrid asked him in SS if he ever did something he couldn't explain when he was scared or frightened. Hagrid is known for his slip of the tongue - Harry was so shocked about the wizard part that he probably doesn't remember the details of what Hagrid said that night - a future Pensieve moment maybe? Every book has Harry summoning something or someone to help him - all quite unaware of his power to do so. How else could he have defeated LV or the DE's as a novice wizard? We know that Colin Creevy did some weird things as other unaware wizards most likely have but I can bet they weren't self-saving like Harry's. From kjones at telus.net Fri Apr 29 00:17:28 2005 From: kjones at telus.net (Kathryn Jones) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 17:17:28 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: <000401c54c4e$7dd35890$0fc6f554@janis> References: <000401c54c4e$7dd35890$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: <42717D18.7090300@telus.net> No: HPFGUIDX 128221 Angie wrote: > > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort at > the MOM in OOP? > -------------------------- Kathy writes: It could be that Dumbledor is interpreting the prophecy to mean that if Voldemort is killed, that it will also kill Harry. Perhaps he is trying to find some way to prevent that from happening before he goes after V. Remember the smoke snake that divided into two. "In essence divided" but it started as one snake. KJ From tonks_op at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 01:07:31 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:07:31 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128222 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort at the MOM in OOP? > Tonks: DD does not kill LV for many reasons. The main one is that DD is a wise and holy man. He knows that to AK someone only bring move evil back into the world and transforms the killer into the same type of person that he killed. ("do not return evil for evil" was said by Jesus for a reason. And it is repeated in other religions as well. Even real witches (Wicca) today say "the evil you send out will come back to you 3 fold".) So there is a valid reason not to resort to the same type of tactics that LV uses. We often hear folks tell us not to stoop to the same level as our enemies. Enemies such as LV expect others to use the same methods that they use. And if we do use the same methods, they win. DD knows this. DD knows it better than anyone because he has seen much in his 150+ years. DD knows that there are other ways to defeat LV. And I am sure that we, along with Harry, will learn them in the books to come. Tonks_op From elfundeb at gmail.com Fri Apr 29 01:35:47 2005 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 21:35:47 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording - why not Neville? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80f25c3a05042818355044b7e@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128223 Greatelderone asked, days ago: > And interesting enough, you seem rather intent in > ignoring the overwhelming amount of evidence that > shows Harry not Neville is the One. Is it so > important that he has to be a prophecy child in > order to play a part in the story when he already > has enough reasons to be against Voldemort? This is an interesting question, that gets at the heart of what we do here and why we do it. Why *do* so many of us (myself included) devote so much time to speculating on why or how Neville could be a prophecy child? I have some possible answers -- CANON. There must be something to support the theory if so many have raised it. And there is. As Geoff has already mentioned, Dumbledore's phrasing leaves the speculation door slightly ajar, as saying he's "afraid" there's no doubt it's Harry is not the same thing as saying there is no doubt. It *is* possible that LV marked Neville as well as Harry, and we don't know it. No I don't think Dumbledore deliberately lied about the meaning of the prophecy, but being human, he ought to make a mistake every once in awhile, and this would be a Really Big Mistake. LOOKING FOR A BANG IN OOP. Some of us were disappointed with the ending of OOP. We were deprived of the now-expected plot twist; no surprise villains turned up in the DoM. If the prophecy itself was intended to be the Big Bang of OOP, it fizzled, because we'd pretty much figured it out in advance. The closest thing to a bang was the revelation that Neville also matched the description. Dumbledore's explanation was like a bucket of cold water -- why have a prophecy if there's no mystery attached to it? As a result, we want to cling to the tantalizing possibility that Neville *could* have been the subject of the prophecy. After all, the prophecy would be really dull if there wasn't some wiggle room for alternative interpretations. Besides, Fallible!Dumbledore is appealing from a number of angles. NEVILLE DESERVES SOME GLORY. Other than Harry himself, Neville may be the most universally appealing character in the book. Oh, JKR tries hard to make him *seem* like a loser. He has a bad memory. He has trouble with magic; Gran berates him about it constantly. JKR even invites us to compare him with Peter Pettigrew ("[Harry] watched, as though somebody was playing a piece of film, Sirius Black blasting Peter Pettigrew (who resembled Neville Longbottom) into a thousand pieces." (POA ch. 11)). But perhaps no character exemplifies better doing what is right rather than what is easy than Neville. Not flashy stuff, of course; his courage involves things like admitting he wrote down the passwords. So, reason three is simply that positing Neville as The One feeds off reader sympathy and reader identification (how many of us see ourselves as talented as Harry, anyway?) In other words, readers are rooting for Neville. On the other hand, it may well be Harry. LV clearly marked him, though we only have Dumbledore's word that he marked Harry "as his equal." Besides, do we really want Neville to slay Voldemort? Can you see Meek!Neville ever wanting to do such a thing? (Especially if Gran has been nagging him all his life telling him that it's his *duty* to avenge his parents' torture and this is the reason why he has tried to deny - consciously or unconsciously - his magical ability) So perhaps Harry will vanquish the Dark Lord after all. And, when that happens, the meek shall inherit the earth. Debbie wondering if she missed any other rationales From Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 02:01:37 2005 From: Unicorn_72 at yahoo.com (unicorn_72) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 02:01:37 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort (Killing Theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128224 This thread got me thinking, and about what has been said in the books about Saving people's lives, the life debt thing. If there is such a strong connection made when you save someones life, then I wonder. What sort of connection is made if you kill someone? I know this may sound odd, but to me if a strong connection or debt is made by saving someones life, is there also not just as likely a chance that by killing someone you gain some part of them, or in fact, some sort of connection in the killing?? I remember the part of the book where the spirit beings or whatever they were came out of Voldemorts wand, so, there must be some connection in killing others. If anyone can add to this or, maybe this has already been stated and I missed it I don't know, just a though. KarentheUnicorn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 02:44:36 2005 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 02:44:36 -0000 Subject: Half-and-half couples (Was: Unconcerned parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128225 SSSusan wrote: > > There is still room for individual differences with students, though, as we know that Seamus' mother had real reservations about allowing Seamus to come back to Hogwarts after Cedric's death and the things she'd read about Harry. That could be that it's easier for her to be informed of the goings on because she *is* in the WW and has access to The Daily Prophet, the Quibbler, Witch Weekly, etc. Carol responds: That brings up an interesting question: *Would* the Finnegans live in the WW? Mr. Finnegan is a Muggle. Where and how would he fit in? I'm guessing that the Finnegans live somewhere in the Irish countryside, in Muggle territory but far enough away from their neighbors that Mrs. F. can receive Witch Weekly and the Daily Prophet by owl post without arousing the curiosity of the neighbors. And no doubt she has Muggle warning devices like the ones JKR advertises on her site (in the Rumours section) in case her husband's relatives drop in uninvited for tea. I can't see a "half and half" family living in a Muggle city (how *did* the Blacks manage to leave the house unseen?), but they couldn't live in a wizarding community, either. (Imagine Mr. Finnegan in Diagon Alley, assuming that people live as well as work there. And he obviously doesn't live in Hogsmeade.) So living near a Muggle village but hidden from view (a la the Weasleys) seems like the only solution, especially if the Muggle spouse has a job in the Muggle world. And he or she would want an address that the postman can find. Carol From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 03:23:58 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:23:58 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128226 --- Angie wrote: > > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort > at the MOM in OOP? > > > > > Tonks: > DD does not kill LV for many reasons. The main one is that DD is a > wise and holy man. He knows that to AK someone only bring move evil > back into the world and transforms the killer into the same type of > person that he killed. Angie again: Wellll . . . I must say that if DD killed LV in self-defense (LV was tring to kill DD), I don't belive that would transform DD into the same type of person as LV. Killing in self-defense is hardly the same as killing for sport or gain or just for the pleasure of it. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 03:27:44 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:27:44 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: <42717D18.7090300@telus.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128227 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Kathryn Jones wrote: > Angie wrote: > > > > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort at > > the MOM in OOP? > > -------------------------- > > Kathy writes: > > It could be that Dumbledor is interpreting the prophecy to mean > that if Voldemort is killed, that it will also kill Harry. [snip] Angie: Hmmmm. Interesting. You may have something there. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 03:30:00 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 03:30:00 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort (Killing Theory) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128228 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "unicorn_72" wrote: > > > > > > What sort of connection is made if you kill someone? I know this may > sound odd, but to me if a strong connection or debt is made by > saving someones life, is there also not just as likely a chance that > by killing someone you gain some part of them, or in fact, some sort > of connection in the killing?? > > Angie: Very interesting. LV has killed so many people, I wonder if this would work in his favor, or against him? From someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au Fri Apr 29 05:30:20 2005 From: someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au (Someone) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:30:20 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128229 > --- Angie wrote: > > > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort > > at the MOM in OOP? > > > > > > > John: This has, I think, been raised before, but nevertheless I'd like to advance the idea once again: if DD *did* try to kill LV there is no guaranteeing that he'd merely be reduced to vapour again. Rather, with the connection between Voldy and Harry having been deepened by all that graveyard stuff, he might, for instance, instead seek refuge with the other voldy-bits presumably trapped within Harry. Not sure what would happen exactly, but it wouldn't bode good for Harry, I know that much. Anyone want to add coherence to this old fart's ramblings? John. From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 29 05:50:46 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:50:46 -0000 Subject: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128230 > > Cheryl: >> I think the point DD was making is that if he'd done NOTHING, if he'd > > not attacked either boy, neither of them would have been 'marked', > he'd have > > won and he'd have not spent 15 or so years floating around as > vapormort. > > > Angie: > I'm sorry -- perhaps I'm being obtuse, but how would he have "won" >if > he had not attacked or marked either boy? Karen: Because in order to fulfil the prophecy to be 'The One', 'The One' has to have been born as the seventh month dies and to have been born to ones who have thrice defied the Dark Lord *AND* [my emphasis] to have been marked by the Dark Lord as his equal. If Lord V had not attacked either of the possible candidates and therefor not marked them, they would not be 'The one' and indeed there would not be a 'one' so he could have carried on safe in the knowlege that there wasn't anyone with the power to defeat him. Thereforehe would have won without lifting a finger. This is why he was so desperate to hear the full prophecy, he realised that there is something odd about Harry (after all he's escaped from hm several times now) and he wan't to know what else there is about him. Whilst on the subject it has been mentioned that it doesn't tell you in the prophecy how to kill Harry. Well my opinion is that it doesn't tell *us*, mere muggles as we are, but I bet it tells Lord V. It he finds out that that scar is the link between them, I bet that will tell him all he needs to know about how to kill Harry. I'm pretty sure Dumbledore is also aware of this. I read somewhere that JKR said that the last word in the last book will be 'scar' and I am of the opinion that it will be something along the lines of ...and Dumbledore waved his wand said {some funny words} and removed the scar. Karen From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Fri Apr 29 05:59:56 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:59:56 -0000 Subject: marrage in the wizarding world In-Reply-To: <20050428152636.14536.qmail@web30707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128231 > Laurie wrote > This is a silly question really but--does anyone know > what part of MOM would license marriage? I hadn't thought about that, so thanks for prompting me! My gut reaction is that they are still citizens of Britain so I would imagine that they just go to the local registery office (or other venues now that the law has changed so that you can). Alternatively there is an English expression "Living over the brush" referring to a couple who live together rather than being married to each other. This comes from ancient times, when in order to show their permanent commitment to each other and to demonstrate the same to the villagers, a couple would jump over a broomstick together! Perhaps it is still something like this?! Karen From kempermentor at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 06:02:35 2005 From: kempermentor at yahoo.com (kempermentor) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 06:02:35 -0000 Subject: Funerals are for the living Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128232 Will we finally see Harry at a funeral or wake? I been able to come up with a weak story on why Harry didn't go to Cedric's funeral. It has to do with Harry feeling uncomfortable as he witnessed it and not wanting to be around Cedric's folks and their grief. But I think Harry AND the Order need to have a funeral or a wake. It doesn't need to be huge. Just a private get together amoung friends and family. What culture doesn't have a death rite? I assume their is no body, but a body isn't needed. Sure, it might be needed for those in denial. But Harry needs a good cry in a safe situation where others may be feeling similarly about needless loss. I feel I need to see Harry grieve and to see him change the shadow of anger and loss into the light of focus and triumph. Kemper From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 06:31:10 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 06:31:10 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128233 From: "Tonks" >> DD does not kill LV for many reasons. The main one is that DD is a wise and holy man. He knows that to AK someone only bring move evil back into the world and transforms the killer into the same type of person that he killed. ("do not return evil for evil" was said by Jesus for a reason. And it is repeated in other religions as well. Even real witches (Wicca) today say "the evil you send out will come back to you 3 fold".) So there is a valid reason not to resort to the same type of tactics that LV uses. We often hear folks tell us not to stoop to the same level as our enemies. Enemies such as LV expect others to use the same methods that they use. And if we do use the same methods, they win. DD knows this. DD knows it better than anyone because he has seen much in his 150+ years. DD knows that there are other ways to defeat LV. And I am sure that we, along with Harry, will learn them in the books to come. >> Bonnie Now: I would love to know how DD defeated the "dark wizard Grindelwald in 1945". I wonder if we will ever be told about that. I keep forgetting that DD has had previous experience fighting dark wizards. Also as was mentioned way back when. DD may not have tried to kill LV because he knew Harry is "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord" and he doesn't want LV turning into 'vapormort' again because DD wants LV to remain mortal so that he CAN be vanquished for good next time. Maybe? Bonnie From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 06:57:56 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 06:57:56 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128234 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Potioncat wrote: > > > More important than whose pensieve is it, IMO, is whose memories > are in it? Harry's Dumbledores? I wouldn't think they'd be looking > into someone else's memories....uh, oh...Merlin help them if it's > Snape's thoughts!! > > > The Other Cheryl responded: > > Perhaps they are looking at Harry's memories of the AK at GH. > Perhaps the Pensieve and HBP contain the answer to JKR's "Why did > Voldemort survive?" question. What would happen to someone who > wandered into the path of an AK inside someone else's memory? > > > Carol responds: > I've said this before, so forgive me for repeating, but thoughts are > not stored in a Pensieve. They are placed there by a person capable of > removing them from his own head--an Occlumens. We have so far seen > only two people capable of performing this intricate bit of magic, > Dumbledore and Snape. Snape is not present in the HBP scene, so, > unless Harry has learned to become a "superb Occlumens" in the time > between the end of OoP and the HBP cover scene, the thoughts or > memories are almost certainly Dumbledore's. Finwitch: I don't know if a person really needs to be an Occlumens to use a pensieve - even if the only people we've seen using one are. And since Voldemort is a Legilimens (did it say he's Occlumens anywhere? Harry has had quite easy access into Voldemort's head via the scar) it fits to the pattern of 'mark him as his equal' that Harry's one too. Dumbledore is both - that twinkle in his eyes is his Occlumency shield. Legilimency is when Harry feels 'X-rayed' or some such. (as when Dumbledore asked about that entrance into the Tournament, or a slight one when he asks 'anything you'd like to tell me'). Harry may have got Legilimency with the scar - so Harry might use it when asking questions without even knowing he's doing it (particularly as he had never heard of that thing before half-way fifth book). Dursleys ARE uncomfortable about him asking questions (Legilimency?) - and how did Harry couldn't help but trust Hagrid, believe all those 'wizard' - things... Finwitch From finwitch at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 07:30:42 2005 From: finwitch at yahoo.com (finwitch) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:30:42 -0000 Subject: Harry's scar/hair (was: Re: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128235 > > Karen: > > Whilst on the subject it has been mentioned that it doesn't tell you > in the prophecy how to kill Harry. Well my opinion is that it doesn't > tell *us*, mere muggles as we are, but I bet it tells Lord V. It he > finds out that that scar is the link between them, I bet that will > tell him all he needs to know about how to kill Harry. I'm pretty > sure Dumbledore is also aware of this. > > I read somewhere that JKR said that the last word in the last book > will be 'scar' and I am of the opinion that it will be something along > the lines of ...and Dumbledore waved his wand said {some funny words} > and removed the scar. Finwitch: I don't know if he can. It could be -- and the only thing left (to remind them) of Lord Voldemort, was Harry's scar. (or ..and nothing was left of Lord Voldemort, not even Harry's scar.) Or, say someone began a pub called Harry's Scar where their final gathering took place.. (... closed the door of/left Harry's Scar.) Or - someone kisses Harry's scar in the end of the book. However, come to think of it, Harry's hair. Now, we know how Harry's hair will grow back within a night if someone shaves it (Much unlike Moody, so it's more or less unique to Harry). I wonder what would happen if loads of people (DA) would drink Polyjuice with Harry's hair in it? I imagine Fred&George could be making some Potter- Pastilles for their financial backer... Finwitch From spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com Fri Apr 29 09:01:27 2005 From: spotthedungbeetle at hotmail.com (dungrollin) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:01:27 -0000 Subject: FILK Yesterbroom Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128236 "Yesterbroom", to the tune of "Yesterday", obviously, and you know who it's by. For Ginger, trying to strike a balance between levity and gravity (a little late). Harry is lamenting the loss of his Nimbus 2000. Harry: Yesterbroom, Without you life is simply full of gloom, Quidditch practice has lost its perfume, How could I break my yesterbroom? Suddenly, There's a total lack of levity, I have an itch to kill that bloody tree, O yesterbroom, why d'you leave me? Why you had to drift? I'm so miffed! You met your doom, I fell off astern, now I yearn for yesterbroom. Yesterbroom, As the branches caught did panic loom? Now in pieces, you've no va-va-voom, O how I miss my yesterbroom. Dungrollin Note - this is a shameless parody of a parody, which was much funnier than mine and entitled "Yestersocks". From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Apr 29 09:56:57 2005 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:56:57 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording - why not Neville? In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a05042818355044b7e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128237 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, elfundeb wrote: > > This is an interesting question, that gets at the heart of what we do > here and why we do it. Why *do* so many of us (myself included) > devote so much time to speculating on why or how Neville could be a > prophecy child? Hickengruendler: I snipped all of Debbie's points, with which I agree, though I want to add, that Neville can of course get the glory he deserves without killing Voldemort. One of the possibilities, namely him defeating Bellatrix, was already mentioned earlier in this thread. However, I want to add another point, which closely ties in to Debbie's point, that she hopes there's some twist involved, that we don't know about. When answering a question about the prophecy on her website, JKR said, that she worded it very carefully, and that she is not going to say anymore. Meaning that there's at least something, that we don't know about, and that Dumbledore's interpretation of the prophecy is probably not 100% correct. Of course this doesn't have to be about Neville, we'll have to see, and I doubt we'll get the answer before the end of book 7. Hickengruendler, who thinks that Harry is the one to defeat Voldemort, but nonetheless would not rule out Neville totally From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 10:01:01 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:01:01 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128238 Alla did some research: > Here is the definition of assault fron on line dictionary. I am not > sure if it goes word by word with my Black Law dictionary ( do NOT do > criminal law), but I seem to remember from my criminal law classes > that threat of force can be enough to establish assault. > > > ASSAULT, crim. law. An assault is any unlawful attempt or offer with > force or violence to do a corporal hurt to another, whether from > malice or wantonness; for example, by striking at him or even holding > up the fist at him in a threatening or insulting manner, or with > other circumstances as denote at the time. an intention, coupled with > a present ability, of actual violence against his person, as by > pointing a weapon at him when he is within reach of it. 6 Rogers Rec: > 9. When the injury is actually inflicted, it amounts to a battery. > (q.v.) > > I especially love the part "or even holding up the fist at him in a > threatening or insulting manner". Ginger asks: Can't even threaten someone? Does this apply to guys in a bar named Stanley who want to kiss your neck? Alla, was this British law? I sure hope so. If not, any of you listees on probation should probably know that you are reading the writings of a criminal right now. Seriously, my point was that law varies from country to country, and even within countries. The WW has its own law, which I highly doubt criminalizes "threatening and insulting" behaviour. What I wonder is under which law Snape will be tried. UK law? WW law? Scottish law? The Court of Public Opinion? That's a dangerous one. No one could stand there. I have noticed (and I say this as an American who loves her country) that there are some (and a vocal group they are) from the US who try to force American thought on the WW. Or should I say "PC thought" rather than "American" as not all of us are PC folks. If Snape is to be tried, it would only be fair to try him under WW laws and customs. To try him under the public opinions of a group this diverse would surely end in mistrial. I am glad this is taking place in the UK. At least the "judges/jury" will have the same cultural backbround as the author. If I was Snape's attorney, I'd say the statute of limitations had expired on #1 and #2, and that there was insufficient evidence on #3. I'd go for a plea bargain on #4, pleading guilty to hurting their ickle feelings and ask for 14 years teaching potions at a minimum security educational facility, with credit for time served. Of course, that's American law, of which I know very little. Ginger, wondering if she is breaking any Venezuelan laws right now. From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Fri Apr 29 11:19:42 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:19:42 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050429111942.69163.qmail@web86207.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128239 --- quigonginger wrote: > I have noticed (and I say this as an American who > loves her country) > that there are some (and a vocal group they are) > from the US who try > to force American thought on the WW. Or should I > say "PC thought" > rather than "American" as not all of us are PC > folks. > Oh dear, I was so waiting for somebody else to say that. Thank you. Now getting that off my chest, I can get back on topic. Every time Snape's teaching method is criminalised, I'm thinking about real world schools, where somebody who wants to learn (somebody like Hermione, in fact) has no chance of survival. She would be constantly ridiculed for doing her homework, for showing some enthusiasm, for not helping to sabotage the lessons. If you ever were a child like that, then you know that Snape-like teacher is your best friend. He gives you an out-of-jail card, you see: you can pretend that you are studying hard not because you are a geek, or whatever is the insult of the day, but because you'd be punished otherwise. Irene Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From MadameSSnape at aol.com Fri Apr 29 11:38:20 2005 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:38:20 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: marrage in the wizarding world Message-ID: <197.3dee9b87.2fa376ac@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128240 In a message dated 4/29/2005 2:02:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time, karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk writes: I hadn't thought about that, so thanks for prompting me! My gut reaction is that they are still citizens of Britain so I would imagine that they just go to the local registery office (or other venues now that the law has changed so that you can). ---------------------------- Sherrie here: Or perhaps they simply use the old Scottish tradition of declaring their intentions in front of one witness (who cannot be an innkeeper), which made Gretna Green a household word? Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 12:38:37 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:38:37 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker andTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128241 Alla did some research: Here is the definition of assault fron on line dictionary. ASSAULT, crim. law. An assault is any unlawful attempt or offer with force or violence to do a corporal hurt to another, whether from malice or wantonness; for example, by striking at him or even holding up the fist at him in a threatening or insulting manner, or with other circumstances as denote at the time. an intention, coupled with a present ability, of actual violence against his person, as by pointing a weapon at him when he is within reach of it. > > 9. When the injury is actually inflicted, it amounts to a battery. (q.v.) I especially love the part "or even holding up the fist at him in a threatening or insulting manner". Ginger asks: Can't even threaten someone? Does this apply to guys in a bar named Stanley who want to kiss your neck? Alla, was this British law? I sure hope so. If not, any of you listees on probation should probably know that you are reading the writings of a criminal right now. Seriously, my point was that law varies from country to country, and even within countries. The WW has its own law, which I highly doubt criminalizes "threatening and insulting" behaviour. Alla: Well, I will reply with the same thing I told Betsy - Snape is the one on trial, nobody else's, so if his behaviour counts as criminal, he should be punished for that. Maybe on next convention we will put you on trial . I am just kidding :-) And no, it's not just threatening words ( mere words do not constitute assault either),it should be threat of FORCE, so the line could be thin. It was Americal law, not British, but I am pretty sure that Snape will be punished under British one. Quickofginger: What I wonder is under which law Snape will be tried. UK law? WW law? Scottish law? The Court of Public Opinion? That's a dangerous one. No one could stand there. I have noticed (and I say this as an American who loves her country) that there are some (and a vocal group they are) from the US who try to force American thought on the WW. Or should I say "PC thought" rather than "American" as not all of us are PC folks. If Snape is to be tried, it would only be fair to try him under WW laws and customs. To try him under the public opinions of a group this diverse would surely end in mistrial. I am glad this is taking place in the UK. At least the "judges/jury" will have the same cultural backbround as the author. Alla: As to punishing him under WW laws... Well, maybe, if we knew ENOUGH of WW laws. Maybe sometimes after all said and done JKR decides to publish some useful additions as to how WW operates in many areas. I see no problem in trying Snape under "muggle" laws. I am well aware that many do not share this POV, but nevertheless I will say it again - I see nothing horrible in comparing WW with RL. JKR is not "wizard" in disguise after all, right? ;-) She is a "muggle" writer,who models many things in WW after "real world", IMO and IMO only. I do NOT think that WW morals and laws are THAT different from ours,or if they are, in my opinion and in my opinion only they will radically change at the end. JKR is also not writing about aliens. She is writing about people, who just happen to be wizards, many of whom come to WW from "real" world,as described by her. So, I think it is perfectly fine for dear Severus to stand trial under muggle laws. As to political correctness, I am not sure if you include me into that vocal group. :-) If you do, well, the only thing I can say in my defense that I did not grew up in America ( although I am an american citizen now), I did all my schooling, except law school outside America . So, not only americans can think that RL person like Snape should not be allowed to approach children. So, I freely admit in "forcing" my real life thought on WW ( I explained my rationale above to the best of my ability), but I will vehemently deny forcing "american thought " upon WW. :-) Irene: Every time Snape's teaching method is criminalised, I'm thinking about real world schools, where somebody who wants to learn (somebody like Hermione, in fact) has no chance of survival. She would be constantly ridiculed for doing her homework, for showing some enthusiasm, for not helping to sabotage the lessons. If you ever were a child like that, then you know that Snape-like teacher is your best friend. He gives you an out-of-jail card, you see: you can pretend that you are studying hard not because you are a geek, or whatever is the insult of the day, but because you'd be punished otherwise. Alla: Really? The teacher who won't let you answer his question,when you are the only one who knows the answer is your best friend? the teacher who,when you are hurt, will look at you and tell you "I see no difference" is your best friend? G-d save me from such teacher friend, to tell you the truth. Now, I suppose that many women on the list can identify with Hermione to some extent ( at least in the "wanting to study" part of her character), I am no exception, although I was not bossy at all. :-) So, what was I getting at? Oh, yes, the best friend. Teacher like Mcgonagall could be my best friend, who indeed forces everybody to study. Teacher who would treat me like Snape did, I would dislike immensely. Alla, who is still amazed how lucky she was in NOT having teachers like Snape EVER during her education. This all had of course been my opinion and my opinion only. Alla. From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Fri Apr 29 13:10:50 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene Mikhlin) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 14:10:50 +0100 (BST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker andTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20050429131050.6570.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128242 --- Alla wrote: > Well, I will reply with the same thing I told Betsy > - Snape is the > one on trial, nobody else's, so if his behaviour > counts as criminal, > he should be punished for that. I see it as a terribly dangerous thing: a law that's so broad that anyone can be put on trial on as needed basis. "As needed" being "we don't like you on this particular day". That's the basis that Soviet justice system operated on: if we want to put you in jail, we can always find a law that lets us do so. Maybe I should go to this conference, carrying "Kangaroo court" poster. Just kidding. > Irene: "Snape-like teacher is a very good thing for Hermione-like pupil" > Alla: > > Really? Why do you think she always protects him when Ron and Harry indulge in a slugfest? > So, what was I getting at? Oh, yes, the best friend. > Teacher like > Mcgonagall could be my best friend, who indeed > forces everybody to > study. But the choice is not between Snape and McGonagall! Sure, if you can have fairness on top of strictness, that's an added bonus. Most of the time the choice is between Snape and Trelawney, Snape and Binns, Snape and Hagrid. I was presented with such choices during my education, and I can honestly say that I've chosen Snape every time. Rowling has her reasons for allowing a clever girl like Hermione to have a blind spot - if she stopped this "helping Neville" business (which no strict teacher would tolerate and which does Neville no favours, really), 99% of her problems in Potions would go away. > > Teacher who would treat me like Snape did, I would > dislike immensely. > > Alla, who is still amazed how lucky she was in NOT > having teachers > like Snape EVER during her education. Don't you see any contradiction in the above statements? And by the way, I've never argued that students who benefit from this kind of teacher will like him. Maybe 20 years after graduation, at the best case. > This all had of course been my opinion and my > opinion only. Same here. Irene Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com From nrenka at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 13:10:56 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:10:56 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128243 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > If I was Snape's attorney, I'd say the statute of limitations had > expired on #1 and #2, and that there was insufficient evidence on > #3. I'd go for a plea bargain on #4, pleading guilty to hurting > their ickle feelings and ask for 14 years teaching potions at a > minimum security educational facility, with credit for time served. > Of course, that's American law, of which I know very little. Statue of Limitations is something that feels very un-WW to me at least, given what little we've seen of the 'legal' system. Oh, they're happy enough to let people off with the correct application of money and/or influence--which got both Lucius Malfoy *and* Severus Snape off. But the WW is, judicially, a profoundly fickle place to say the least... There are stains that don't come off, you know. Absent the details that would mitigate participation (and I mean an actual level of knowledge, not "Dumbledore said he's clean!), having participated in the DEs to the level to have the Dark Mark is the sort of thing that I don't think one can ever escape. I still think a good analogy to such is the SS (back, Godwin! JKR made the comparison first, which means your Law applies not). Number One and Two are still up in the air as to details, but could be either a strong or a weak argument. Number Three hasn't been proven false, but it hasn't been *not* proven false yet either. Number Four is more a case for civil court, and has teeth in it depending on which legal system you use. Still pretty morally reprehensible, the exercise of authority in that manner. YMMV. -Nora notes that people are getting rather exercised over something that made her giggle, and notes that the odds are very, very good that all presenters will be scrambling and that Hurricane Jo may rip the roof off of the courtroom From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 13:15:44 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:15:44 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording - why not Neville? In-Reply-To: <80f25c3a05042818355044b7e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128244 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, elfundeb wrote: > CANON. There must be something to support the theory if so many have > raised it. And there is. GEO: A majority does not equal truth. There are also Harry is the Heir of Godric Gryffindor theories out there and so far despite going past the half way point for the saga and so many numerous clues that theory so far has turned out to be a dead end. > It *is* possible that LV marked Neville > as well as Harry, and we don't know it. GEO: Yes it is, but certainly not as his equal. The Death Eaters also have been marked by Voldemort, but only Harry has been marked through the scar and the events of 10/31/81 as somewhat of an equal to Voldemort. No I don't think Dumbledore > deliberately lied about the meaning of the prophecy, but being human, > he ought to make a mistake every once in awhile, and this would be a > Really Big Mistake. GEO: Thing is, Dumbledore along with Hermione is JKR's two main sources of giving us information. To have him turn out to be wrong in this case would equal the writer actually cheating her fans and readers at this point. The closest thing to a bang was the > revelation that Neville also matched the description. Dumbledore's > explanation was like a bucket of cold water -- why have a prophecy if > there's no mystery attached to it? GEO: You mean like how will Voldemort be destroyed by the power that he knows not? Or how did the Potters and Longbottoms defy him three times and who was the one that brought the prophecy to the attention of the Dark Lord. As a result, we want to cling to > the tantalizing possibility that Neville *could* have been the subject > of the prophecy. After all, the prophecy would be really dull if > there wasn't some wiggle room for alternative interpretations. > Besides, Fallible!Dumbledore is appealing from a number of angles. GEO: I'm sure there is some alternative interpretation, but certainly not an alternative that would prove in the end that the information given by Dumbledore and thus the author of the story wrong. Dumbledore is only wrong in his choices and actions, but so far he is Rowling's mouth piece and still knows pretty much everything because the author knows everything there is to the story. JKR even > invites us to compare him with Peter Pettigrew ("[Harry] watched, as > though somebody was playing a piece of film, Sirius Black blasting > Peter Pettigrew (who resembled Neville Longbottom) into a thousand > pieces." (POA ch. 11)). GEO: And so far we know he is nothing like Pettigrew. I believe those comparisons can be identified as nothing, but red herrings put into the story by Rowling. > So, reason three is simply that positing Neville as The One feeds off > reader sympathy and reader identification (how many of us see > ourselves as talented as Harry, anyway?) In other words, readers are > rooting for Neville. GEO: So basically you really have no textual evidence for this and support this only because of your desire to have Neville look good at the end? From Meliss9900 at aol.com Fri Apr 29 13:38:33 2005 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 09:38:33 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording - why not Neville? Message-ID: <1e1.3b78248f.2fa392d9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128245 In a message dated 4/29/2005 8:19:18 AM Central Standard Time, No I don't think Dumbledore > deliberately lied about the meaning of the prophecy, but being human, > he ought to make a mistake every once in awhile, and this would be a > Really Big Mistake. I consider Dumbledore's behavior towards/treatment of Harry in OOTP to be his Really Big Mistake. One that he won't make again. Think of all the bad things that could have been avoided had he sat down with Harry at the beginning of the school year and explained exactly what he believed was going on regarding Voldemort's plans. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Apr 29 14:12:06 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 14:12:06 -0000 Subject: Purging the DE ranks and deadly!Sirius (was Re: The boys holding the prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128246 AyanEva: And there's still the question of how a bunch of kids can best a bunch of fully grown evil wizards. A bit of bad writing, or maybe the DEs were sabotaged by their Master so that their fighting skills would be compromised? Just a thought. Sorry, I know I keep asking questions that probably have no answer, but I'm just dying for a theory. Nora: Well, they are trying to avoid smashing the shiny as much as possible- -which causes some restraint. It has also been postulated that casting things like Killing Curses is rather exhausting, and not their top priority at the moment. In addition, remember that sheer individual competence is really not necessary to run an effective reign of terror. I think we all underestimate the DEs in some areas and overestimate them in others. Pippin: Courage cannot be measured in years, or inches, especially if you have a magic wand at your disposal -- or a slingshot (ask Goliath.) Neville, Ron, Ginny and Luna have been coached by a Tri-wizard champion and *his* coach. But even so, I suppose they might have been killed if the DE's had wanted to kill them. But did they? IIRC, only Hermione, the Muggleborn, is threatened with an AK and hit with another curse that might have killed her. Neville, Ron and Ginny are members of prominent pureblood families, and Luna is daughter to the publisher of the WW's alternative newspaper -- killing them is not going to be as easy to keep out of the press as the death of Cedric Diggory. If they die or disappear Fudge is going to have to take action quickly whether he believes Lord Thingy is back or not. I can think of another reason not to injure Ginny or Luna too badly. The pureblood marriage pool is shrinking and in such situations females are at a premium. (Eww...but it's a consideration. Malfoy, Nott and Goyle have sons approaching marriageable age.) In any case, only two of the DE's have been "bested" when the rescue party arrives. Babyhead was injured by accident. We don't know what happened to Nott, but since he was *behind* the kids as they fled, it's a good possibility that he was felled by friendly fire. Nora: Would she make a character objectively evil and assign them the form of one of her favorite animals? I don't think so. (Of course, her pegging of Lupin as a favorite character has been interpreted as not telling us that he's not evil, so anything can fly.) That is, of course, separate from individual feelings about characters, which are completely up to anyone. But if you're looking for more concrete and less subjective things to pin on someone, it's always good to keep the author's orientation in mind when guessing whether things will be made manifest in the text or not. -Nora herself expects Rowling's comments about various characters to be made rather manifest in textual events Pippin: Me too. And since "Courage is the main thing with me" and Dumbledore says the highest form of courage is standing up to your friends, I would expect a character who lacks that attribute to ultimately lose the sympathy of the reader, while those who have it, such as Sirius and Snape, will ultimately be vindicated. Pippin From littleleah at handbag.com Fri Apr 29 16:19:52 2005 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:19:52 -0000 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128247 Angie wrote: What the heck did DD mean in OOP when he told Harry that, "He [LV} set out to kill you when you were still a baby, believing he was fulfulling the terms of the prophecy. He discovered, to his cost,that he was mistaken, when the curse intended to kill you backfired." and in a later post: "nkafkafi" wrote: > Lets look at the prophecy from Voldy's POV. Try to > forget for a moment that you know the second half, and look only at > the part that HE knows: > > "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... born > to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies..." > Angie replies: It just occured to me as I read your post: How could LV think he was "fulfulling" this prophesy, when it didn't require him to DO anything? He had nothing to do with the "one" who was approaching. Am I being too simplistic or hyper-technical? Leah; Excuse me massively snipping these posts. I've read through the thread and I don't think Angie has had an answer to something I've never noticed before and is a really interesting question. LV's eavesdropper tells him the part of the prophesy quoted above. As we interpret it, one is going to come who can vanquish the Dark Lord (voldemort), and that One can be identified by the actions of its parents and the date of its birth. According to DD, there are two possible candidates for the job, Neville and Harry, and, having for his own reasons, selected Harry as the most likely, Voldemort sets out to destroy him, (and thus fulfills the next part of the prophecy, and provides the third and final identifier, by marking Harry). So far so good. By trying to destroy Prophecy Boy, Voldemort is acting in a long tradition of mythic villains. Perseus, Oedipus, Jason, Paris, were all prophesied as bringing doom on their fathers and grandfathers, and were therefore sent away, exposed on mountains etc in an attempt to defeat the terms of the prophecies ( and of course thereby bringing about the conditions to fulfill them). But Perseus' grandfather and the others weren't trying to fulfill the prophecies, they were trying to prevent that fulfillment, and the general assumption, I think it's safe to say, is that Voldemort is also trying to prevent the prophecy from coming true, ie. prevent his vanquishing, even though his actions in doing so are a mistake from his point of view. But that's not what DD says. He doesn't say Voldemort set out to GH to prevent the prophecy coming true, he says he set out 'believing he was fulfilling the terms of the prophecy' As Angie asks, what the heck does it mean? To fulfill the prophecy by killing Harry, Harry must be the Dark Lord, and Voldemort the one with the power to vanquish him. I hope that doesn't make sense. And it doesn't in terms of the prophecy wording. You could try "the one with the power to vanquish, the Dark Lord, approaches", but the next lines then make no sense at all. Who is the 'him' who is being defied? And it's not that Voldemort wants to end it all and get baby Harry to zap him- he tries to kill Harry. Or is it just an ancestor/descendent deliberate mistake? Leah From ayaneva at aol.com Fri Apr 29 06:23:08 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 06:23:08 -0000 Subject: 2 book rule In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128248 > tigerpatronus: > There is a theory about the "2 book rule," which says that an > important magic or person is introduced 2 books before it becomes > absolutely huge. > GoF --> HBP: > The international wizarding world via the Quiddich Cup > and the TriWizard Tourney. Beauxbatons and Durmstrung. > Portkeys. Death Eaters ("The One who has left us") and > the Dark Mark. Brother wands. Victor Krum. Veela. > Leprechans. Harry gives Gred and Forge his Triwizard > winnings for a joke shop. > > tinglinger: > In addition to the above, the Lovegoods > are also first mentioned in GOF. In particular, Luna's dad > will be killed by Goyle Sr. as one of the first, if not the first > victim of the Second War, and Luna will play an important role in > Harry's life during HBP. > This scenario is now even more probable if the 2 Book rule is valid. In my discussion on another thread about the Grim, I remembered another 2 Book rule occurance: PoA Sirius and the Grim, OoTP Sirius and Grimauld Place. I'm certain it's been mentioned before, but I figured I'll throw it out there anyway. Unfortunately, I'll have to agree that Luna and/or her father are going to play an important role somewhere down the line. Maybe the solution to the Voldie problem is something that everyone was convinces was a myth but is actually real and the only people that know anything about it are Luna and/or her father. AyanEva From antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 16:39:12 2005 From: antoshachekhonte at yahoo.com (antoshachekhonte) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:39:12 -0000 Subject: Prophecy wording - why not Neville? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128249 > GEO: So basically you really have no textual evidence for this and > support this only because of your desire to have Neville look good > at the end? Antosha: In fairness, I think there's more to say for the theory than that--beginning with the question of why Rowling had DD mention Neville in connection with the prophecy at all, if not to set up a 'surprise' ending to the series. If, at this point, it were Neville and not Harry who cast the spell that defeated LV, JKR would at least be able to point back and say, "Ah, but I told you it might be him!" I wrote a novel-length fic that started from the premise that Neville ended up as the hero. Mind, I wasn't particularly interested in this part of the question; I was more curious to see what Harry would do with himself if both his fame and his magical prowess (in the fic, LV's death stripped Harry of much of his power) were greatly diminished. Just a little gedanke- experiment. Having said that, I think it's very unlikely that, at the end, Neville will be the great hero of the series. Possible, but unlikely. However, I think his inclusion in the discussion is a mark of how far his character's prominence has risen, and of the fact that he is likely to play a crucial role in the unfolding of the series' central conflict. From ayaneva at aol.com Fri Apr 29 06:30:25 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 06:30:25 -0000 Subject: Purging the DE ranks and deadly!Sirius (was Re: The boys holding the prophecy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128250 > > AyanEva: > > And there's still the question of how a bunch of kids can best a > > bunch of fully grown evil wizards. A bit of bad writing, or maybe > > the DEs were sabotaged by their Master so that their fighting > > skills would be compromised? Just a thought. Sorry, I know I keep > > asking questions that probably have no answer, but I'm just dying > > for a theory. > >Nora responds: Well, they are trying to avoid smashing the shiny as much as possible- > -which causes some restraint. It has also been postulated that > casting things like Killing Curses is rather exhausting, and not > their top priority at the moment. In addition, remember that sheer > individual competence is really not necessary to run an effective > reign of terror. I think we all underestimate the DEs in some areas > and overestimate them in others. AyanEva says: True, true. But why would they give a crap about whether or not they completely destroyed all of the other prophesies anyway? If they had any personal prophesies in there, I'm sure they've heard them already. Considerate isn't an attribute I'd associate with a DE. I'd expect them to just blast away haphazardly. But good point about the AK and other dark curses being exhausting. That in itself is, I think, evidence to your other point about individual competence. If the DE's had been at all clever, they'd would've just used some low level curses like Stupify and Petrificus Totalus, grabbed the prophesy, and retreated. Speaking of which, I know that the only people who can pick the prophecy up are those whom the prophecy is about. But if the prophecy's not about you, can't you wrap the little globe thingie up in a towel and be done with it? You're not actually physically touching it, after all. Just a thought. And that leads right back to one of my main problems with Voldie and Death Eaters: They're a really (seemingly) incompetent bunch. I'd fight against them for the sole reason that I'd be so annoyed by their sheer stupidity in some situations! I'm all about tactical advantage and logical planning; I'm quite convince that I'd be a much better evil overlord than Voldie. > > > > In post 128165, Sherry wrote: > > Ok, I'm a broken record on this topic, I guess. However, recently > > on this list, we discussed JKR's statements about why people take > > the animagus forms they do. She was quoted as saying that the > > animagus form comes from inside the wizard, based on their > > personality, who they are inside. > > > AyanEva: > > But the Grim's a dog and it heralds death. That's not exactly good > > unless you have a death wish. Speaking of which, setting aside my > > previously mentioned dislike for Sirius, I've always wondered why > > JKR chose to equate him with a Grim for half the book until they > > found out that he was just an animagus dog? > Nora: > (Well, there is the more obvious point that the narrative structure > of PoA absolutely hinges on things in plain sight being > misinterpreted, leading to a resolution that hinges on reversal...) AyanEva: Crap. Forgot about that. You're right! I sometimes wonder if the whole book isn't somehow a reversal to get us all thrown off track. Personally, I think it falls in line with MAGIC DISHWASHER; but then again, I like the idea of tons of subterfuge and slight of hand. AyanEva From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 16:44:39 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:44:39 -0000 Subject: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128251 ---> > > Cheryl: > >> I think the point DD was making is that if he'd done NOTHING, if > he'd > > > not attacked either boy, neither of them would have been 'marked', > > he'd have > > > won and he'd have not spent 15 or so years floating around as > > vapormort. > > > > > Angie: > > I'm sorry -- perhaps I'm being obtuse, but how would he have "won" > >if > > he had not attacked or marked either boy? > > Karen: > > Because in order to fulfil the prophecy to be 'The One', 'The One' has > to have been born as the seventh month dies and to have been born to > ones who have thrice defied the Dark Lord *AND* [my emphasis] to have > been marked by the Dark Lord as his equal. > > If Lord V had not attacked either of the possible candidates and > therefor not marked them, they would not be 'The one' and indeed there > would not be a 'one' so he could have carried on safe in the knowlege > that there wasn't anyone with the power to defeat him. Thereforehe > would have won without lifting a finger. > > Angie: So, you're saying that whomever "The One" is, he would not have the power to vanquish Voldemort unless Voldemort marked him? A conditional prophesy? I don't read the prophecy that way. The prophecy doesn't say the One will have the power IF Voldemort marks him as his equal. It says "And." I read that as two separate occurrences. The one who has the power to vanquish approaches and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal. Karen: > > I read somewhere that JKR said that the last word in the last book > will be 'scar' and I am of the opinion that it will be something along > the lines of ...and Dumbledore waved his wand said {some funny words} > and removed the scar. > > Angie: Interesting. I didn't know she said that. Maybe when Harry kills Voldemort (No, I can't accept that Harry will die), the scar will simply disappear, because the connection between them will no longer exist [sort of the way Riddle disappeared when Harry destroyed the diary, but not so violently]. :) Perhaps the book will end in a rather hum-drum manner with Harry going to wash his face and finding to his suprise, that his forehead is not longer marked with the scar. Or maybe with a phrase like, "In the years to come, Harry often found himself absently rubbing the spot where he bore the infamous scar." Something like that. Obviously, I'm no JKR, but you get the picture. Yes, I know DD said in SS that Harry will always have the scar, but DD is not infallible and it is clear that he does not understand everything that's going on. From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 29 16:48:12 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:48:12 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128252 Nora closed with: > -Nora notes that people are getting rather exercised over something > that made her giggle, and notes that the odds are very, very good > that all presenters will be scrambling and that Hurricane Jo may rip > the roof off of the courtroom Potioncat: I'd planned to send a post saying we all have the same information about Snape. The interesting part of the trial would be how the "lawyers" presented it. I was going to say, unless one of them could call JKR herself to the witness stand it would be a lot of nothing new, even if it was fun. But, now that I look at the date...about 10 days or so after the next book, it will be very, very interesting! It will be a race to see which "lawyer" can extract the most useful material from HBP. But you are very right, Nora, the roof might be off! In the mean time, it is in fun. In fact, at one time Alla and I had joked that we needed to have a trial over the "Oops" moment to see if Snape would be found guilty or inocent of breaking Harry's potion vial. Or for that matter, if there was enough evidence to charge him. Potioncat who wonders if any other minor character has ever generated so much discussion and emotion? From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 16:50:26 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 16:50:26 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128253 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Someone" wrote: > > --- Angie wrote: > > > > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill > Voldemort > > > at the MOM in OOP? > > > > > > > > > > > > John: > This has, I think, been raised before, but nevertheless I'd like to > advance the idea once again: if DD *did* try to kill LV there is no > guaranteeing that he'd merely be reduced to vapour again. Rather, > with the connection between Voldy and Harry having been deepened by > all that graveyard stuff, he might, for instance, instead seek > refuge with the other voldy-bits presumably trapped within Harry. > Not sure what would happen exactly, but it wouldn't bode good for > Harry, I know that much. > > Anyone want to add coherence to this old fart's ramblings? > > Angie: So, so much doesn't bode well for young Harry, I'm afraid! Far be it from me to add coherence. I just like to pose questions and absorb the theories! :) What you say makes perfect sense, especially given the "in essence" bit in OOP. Perhaps this sheds new light on the "there are things worse than death" speech. I'd always looked at this either as either what DD thought would be worse than death for LV or what LV himself would think was worse than death. But maybe DD believes for Harry, having LV "inhabit" him would be worse than death. I guess the only way to avoid all this is to have Harry kill LV. From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Apr 29 17:47:28 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 17:47:28 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128254 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" wrote: > Potioncat: > > Potioncat who wonders if any other minor character has ever generated > so much discussion and emotion? Oh, yeah, at various times and in various genres. The elevation of secondary characters is an old tradition. Arguments about Hamlet's relatives, for instance, have gone on for centuries and in the early twentieth century there was an entire cottage industry analyzing Renfield (from Dracula). In the 1950s, William Frawley's character of Fred Mertz was widely viewed as the second star of "I Love Lucy," with a popularity barely behind that of Lucy Ricardo, herself. Hucklebery Finn was a far more popular character than Tom Sawyer, which is why he got his own book. In the serializations of Dickens' novels characters like Fagin and the Artful Dodger often eclipsed the putative hero in popularity among readers. What makes these characters different from our perspective is that we "know" their stories. In some cases they were in genres quite different from that of HP, so the suspense about them was different - if there was any suspense at all. In other cases, like the Dickens serials, time has revealed the secrets of the characters. We "know" now what became of Fagin and the Artful Dodger, so they don't hold the interest for us that they did for readers of the early serials. I tend to agree that ACCIO will gather in a very different climate than that of the present. Some of the questions may look very different than they do now. I don't think we will know ALL there is to know, even if Snape doesn't survive the sixth book (which I think is a real possibility, although not a probability). JKR will reserve some tension for Book VII. What will be VERY interesting is how future readers view Snape. Even those who come to the books for the first time will not have the experience of seeing the characters' stories unfold over years. Like with Dickens, they will be able to read the entire story over a brief period. And their view of the characters, unshaped by delay and years of argument/discussion/brooding, will be very different from ours. Most likely, whatever happens to Snape, they will say "Okay, he's an interesting guy, but come on now! What was the big deal, anyway?" Lupinlore From bob.oliver at cox.net Fri Apr 29 18:19:38 2005 From: bob.oliver at cox.net (lupinlore) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 18:19:38 -0000 Subject: Foregiveness and Redemption: Lewis, Christianity, JKR, and the Potterverse Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128255 We have had a lot of discussion recently (and always) about Snape's guilt and need for redemption, or his lack of guilt as the case may be. We have had similar discussions about Percy Weasley I would like to join this with the speculation that Rowling might be writing from some kind of Christian perspective. I don't know that she is, but let's assume it for the sake of this discussion. Truth to tell, I rather suspect the HP series IS closer to Christian allegory than to Joseph Campbell, but time will reveal the answer. If she is writing from some Christian perspect a la C.S. Lewis, this brings up interesting points about redemption. From that perspective, redemption comes from foregiveness. Now, and this is very important, foregiveness is NOT something that is earned through any kind of behavior or action. It is something that is freely given, no strings attached, when a person repents (which, in this perspective, means to express genuine sorrow and remorse and genuine intention to turn away from sin). The status of good behavior, and particularly of specific acts, under this perspective is rather problematic. Good actions, IN AND OF THEMSELVES, are not very important. One does not earn redemption in return for actions. Thus, Snape's saving Harry, IN AND OF ITSELF, is not really important in this view. Good actions may, of course, be a SIGN of repentence. That is, when one turns from sin one will, naturally, act in a different way. However, the actions THEMSELVES are not the bringers of redemption, and may be misleading. One can perform good acts for many reasons. It may be because of genuine repentence. It may be because of a misguided belief that one can "earn their way into Heaven." It may be as a sign of pride, to prove that one is morally superior to another person. It may be as a form of self-preservation. The acts themselves are irrelevant, as far as the moral status of the person is concerned. What is relevant is the source from which the actions spring. That means that Snape, under this view, can't be evaluated until we have more information. If his actions spring from genuine sorrow and a desire to do good, he is redeemed. If they spring from another reason, EVEN A DESIRE TO EARN REDEMPTION, then he is not a redeemed character. This may not seem fair, but it is the way things run under this kind of belief system. Snape's actions in saving Harry and spying on Voldemort (if that is what he is doing) are not important in and of themselves. What is important is the source of those actions. At this point, we just don't have enough evidence. Snape may well prove to have been genuinely redeemed. On the other hand, his actions may prove to have been misleading with regard to his moral status, as is often the case in real life according to this kind of Christian view. C.S. Lewis illustrates this himself in his book "The Great Divorce," where he shows a murderer who was nevertheless truly repentent in Heaven, and a pillar of the community motivated by desire to prove his moral worth in Hell. In other words, we may yet see Severus redeemed, but it is also perfectly possible that Severus will turn out to be one of the damned, his good actions notwithstanding. This brings up a point people often argue about. What if a person is not penitent because they genuinely feel they are not wrong? This applies perhaps more to Percy than to Snape. Shouldn't Percy (or Seamus or Cho or even Umbridge) get a break if they honestly believe themselves to be in the right? The answer, in this perspective, is a flat NO. There are two realizations that lead to the beginning of wisdom. 1. There is a God. 2. You ain't Him. Your own understanding is not important. What is important is whether you are acting in accordance with God's edicts. The Court of God has no appeal, no rules of equity, and no patience for arguments about technicalities or interpretations. You are in accord with God's edicts or not, and if you aren't your only recourse is genuine repentence. If you aren't able to do that -- well, the results won't be pretty. Once again, C.S. Lewis illustrates this in "The Great Divorce" when he makes a "plea in equity" to an angel, who replies "I am sorry. However we will not allow middens to be built in our gardens because there are those who cannot abide the smell of roses." So, under this way of thinking, is the fact that Percy/Seamus/even Umbridge acting out of genuine belief important? No, it is not. So, how will all this end up, if JKR is indeed operating under this kind of rubric? I'm afraid it may end up at a place that a lot of people will think of as rather unfair. Snape MAY (but not definitely WILL) end up being seen as damned despite his good actions, and despite even sacrificing his life to defeat Voldemort, come to that. Others who acted out of the best of intentions and with genuine belief may end up being condemned as evil. That is not to say that Percy/Seamus/even Umbridge WILL end up this way, but it is perfectly possible under this belief system. Just a little intellectual exercise. Comments, additions, arguments, etc. would be welcome. Lupinlore From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 18:24:44 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 18:24:44 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: <20050429131050.6570.qmail@web86201.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128256 Irene: "Snape-like teacher is a very good thing for Hermione-like pupil" Alla: Really? Irene: Why do you think she always protects him when Ron and Harry indulge in a slugfest? Alla: Um, I can only speculate of course, but I will try. Maybe because she has respect for ALL teachers ( Umbridge excluded of course) regardless of how competent they are and how well they treat her? She did like Gilderoy after all and defended him. Seriously though, I believe that the reason Hermione defends Snape has absolutely nothing to do with his teaching abilities ( am prepared to eat my words of course, since it is just speculation). I think she knows some kind of secret about Snape AND just as she kept Remus secret shekeeps Snape's. Honestly, if I believed that Snape is a vampire, I would say that maybe Hermione somehow discovered that he is. :-) Alla earlier : Teacher like Mcgonagall could be my best friend, who indeed forces everybody to study. Irene: But the choice is not between Snape and McGonagall! Sure, if you can have fairness on top of strictness, that's an added bonus. Most of the time the choice is between Snape and Trelawney, Snape and Binns, Snape and Hagrid. Alla: I am afraid I don't understand. We are talking about which teacher is the best teacher for Hermione, right? From ALL Hogwarts teachers, correct? So, I would say that Snape is nowhere near on the top of her list, McGonagall should be, IMO. Alla earlier: Teacher who would treat me like Snape did, I would dislike immensely. Alla, who is still amazed how lucky she was in NOT having teachers like Snape EVER during her education. Irene: Don't you see any contradiction in the above statements? And by the way, I've never argued that students who benefit from this kind of teacher will like him. Maybe 20 years after graduation, at the best case. Alla: Honestly, no I don't. And I understand that you have not argued that Snape is likeable. The gist of your argument as I understand it is that Snape's teaching is all for little brats benefit, correct? They will understand it when they are older, right? :-) Sorry, if I am misunderstanding you. And the gist of mine is that for the little brats benefit Snape should not be allowed anywhere near them. :-) Just my opinion of course, Alla From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Apr 29 19:05:42 2005 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 19:05:42 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128257 Carol: > I'm not even sure that the organization [the DEs] itself was illegal, > though its activities undoubtedly were. More important, it's an open > question whether the young Snape knew what the organization > was about, and as of now we have insufficient evidence to indicate > that he did. SSSusan: Hmmm. Can others who're more well versed in the law in other nations (particularly in the UK) let us know whether the oft-stated-in-America remark, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" holds? "I was young, I didn't know any better" would not, methinks, get a person very far in a court of law, especially when the young person was, presumably, of legal age, even if just barely so. Just a thought. Siriusly Snapey Susan From willsonkmom at msn.com Fri Apr 29 19:13:12 2005 From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 19:13:12 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128258 > Alla: snip > I think {Hermione} she knows some kind of secret about Snape AND just as she > kept Remus secret shekeeps Snape's. Honestly, if I believed that > Snape is a vampire, I would say that maybe Hermione somehow > discovered that he is. :-) Potioncat: Alla and I so rarely agree about Professor Snape, I thought a "Me Too" post would be allowed and welcomed. So, Me too. Hermione knows something about Snape, either through the Vampire Essay, or through something at 12GP. But while I think he wants the students to learn, and while many may do exceptionally well, I do not think he is a good teacher. Potioncat: I snipped too much and had to add Hermione's name to Alla's post. From greatelderone at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 20:05:39 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 20:05:39 -0000 Subject: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128259 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > Angie: > So, you're saying that whomever "The One" is, he would not have the > power to vanquish Voldemort unless Voldemort marked him? A > conditional prophesy? I don't read the prophecy that way. The > prophecy doesn't say the One will have the power IF Voldemort marks > him as his equal. It says "And." I read that as two separate > occurrences. The one who has the power to vanquish approaches and > the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal. GEO: We don't know how exactly Harry would vanquish Voldemort yet with the powers that he knows not. If however he vanquishes Voldemort through either the scar or something else that was a result of that Halloween Day then couldn't we assume that he became the One to vanquish the Dark Lord only because Voldemort marked him? > Yes, I know DD said in SS that Harry will always have the scar, but > DD is not infallible and it is clear that he does not understand > everything that's going on. GEO: He is not infallible, but within the realm of the story, all information that he gives to the reader can be viewed as nothing, but the divine words of the writer. So in a nutshell, he can make mistakes of judgement, but not mistakes of fact. From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Fri Apr 29 20:25:27 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:25:27 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <42729837.5070808@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128260 Alla wrote: > > Irene: > > Why do you think she always protects him when Ron and > Harry indulge in a slugfest? > > Alla: > > Um, I can only speculate of course, but I will try. Maybe because she > has respect for ALL teachers ( Umbridge excluded of course) regardless > of how competent they are and how well they treat her? No, she does not have any respect for Trelawney, for example. > I think she knows some kind of secret about Snape AND just as she > kept Remus secret shekeeps Snape's. Honestly, if I believed that > Snape is a vampire, I would say that maybe Hermione somehow > discovered that he is. :-) That would be a very interesting twist, of course. And angry mob will attack JRK's house. :-) > Irene: > But the choice is not between Snape and McGonagall! > Sure, if you can have fairness on top of strictness, > that's an added bonus. > Most of the time the choice is between Snape and > Trelawney, Snape and Binns, Snape and Hagrid. > > Alla: > > I am afraid I don't understand. We are talking about which teacher is > the best teacher for Hermione, right? From ALL Hogwarts teachers, > correct? That wasn't quite what I meant. In the context of a real-life school, where somebody like Hermione would be discouraged by her peers from demonstrating any commitment, strict teacher is much better than a "nice" but ineffectual one. If that strict teacher happens to be fair (McGonagall), that's excellent, but even if he's not, it's still better than the other choice. Oh, I need Shaun to come to my rescue, he always explains it so much better than I do. Alla: > > Honestly, no I don't. And I understand that you have not argued that > Snape is likeable. The gist of your argument as I understand it is > that Snape's teaching is all for little brats benefit, correct? No, he could not care less about the little brats' benefit. :-) It's just that if in the class of 30 little brats happens to be one or two capable students, the rest of the brats have to be scared into not interfering with them. That's a quote from a secondary school pupil during recent BBC discussion on education: " All the other students mistreat the teacher and prevent me and my friends from working adequately." His teacher seems to be more like Binns than McGonagall, don't you think? I think somebody like Snape would be quite high on his list of alternatives. > They > will understand it when they are older, right? :-) Yes, some of them. :-) > > And the gist of mine is that for the little brats benefit Snape > should not be allowed anywhere near them. :-) Well, his record in exam results and accidents statistics seems to be against this conclusion. IMHO, of course. :-) Irene From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 21:08:43 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:08:43 -0000 Subject: Kids v DEs(wasPurging the DE ranks and deadly!Sirius(wasRe: The boys holding...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128261 >>AyanEva: >And there's still the question of how a bunch of kids can best a bunch of fully grown evil wizards.< Betsy: But the kids *didn't* best the wizards. Every single one of them was down, Harry was surrounded, Neville was in the middle of being tortured by Bellatrix, and Harry was just about to hand over the prophecy in order to stop Neville being tortured (though I doubt Bellatrix would have stopped) when Order wizards came streaming to the rescue. (OotP Scholastic hardback p.801) Actually, I was rather pleased with JKR that she didn't take the Disney route. (You know, where a group of spunky kids take on the Mob with their mad skateboard skills and succeed where the goofy, but somewhat cute and sweetly interested in most-spunky-kid's single mom, FBI agent failed.) The only thing Harry's group did, and did well, was create enough chaos by splitting into groups and making use of the labyrinth-like DoM rooms to lessen the skill advantage the adult wizards had. They *delayed* the inevitable, but the inevitable occured, and Harry and crew had been well and truly beaten before the calvary arrived. >>Pippin: >But even so, I suppose they might have been killed if the DE's had wanted to kill them. But did they?< Betsy: I think, in the end, the DE's would have been happy to kill any and all of the kids. Here's Lucius giving instructions after the kids have all taken to ground: "...don't forget, be gentle with Potter until we've got the prophecy, you can kill the others if necessary." (ibid p.788) Shortly after that a DE throws an aborted killing curse at Hermione (ibid p.789), later a silenced DE throws a purple curse at Hermione and knocks her completely out - which gave me the impression that if he'd been able to vocalize, Hermione would have been killed (ibid p.792). And on the same page the same DE kicks Neville hard enough in the face to break his wand and his nose. Ginny is grabbed with enough violence that her ankle gets broken (ibid p.795), and Luna is hit with a spell that is stong enough to propel her through the air and knock her completely out (ibid p.797) No one handles the children gently. (I wonder how they'll handle this scene in the medium that should not be named? Seems awfully violent for a kids' film.) And I didn't see any evidence of the DE's holding back. Which is why they almost won. Betsy From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 21:11:34 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:11:34 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: <42729837.5070808@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128262 Irene earlier : But the choice is not between Snape and McGonagall! Sure, if you can have fairness on top of strictness,that's an added bonus.Most of the time the choice is between Snape and Trelawney, Snape and Binns, Snape and Hagrid. Alla earlier: I am afraid I don't understand. We are talking about which teacher is the best teacher for Hermione, right? From ALL Hogwarts teachers, correct? Irene: That wasn't quite what I meant. In the context of a real-life school, where somebody like Hermione would be discouraged by her peers from demonstrating any commitment, strict teacher is much better than a "nice" but ineffectual one. If that strict teacher happens to be fair (McGonagall), that's excellent, but even if he's not, it's still better than the other choice. Alla: Oh, I got your reasoning , I think. I am afraid I have to ask you for canon examples,where Snape encourages Hermione to study in his calss. I can cite you some examples to the contrary, if you want to, where Snape makes Hermione shut up, oh... I don't know ... all the time. Irene: No, he could not care less about the little brats' benefit. :-) It's just that if in the class of 30 little brats happens to be one or two capable students, the rest of the brats have to be scared into not interfering with them. Alla: OK, I just don't see any proof that Snape considers Hermione to be capable student, who needs to be encouraged and supported in her studying. I think that the reason Hermione is continuing to excel in Potions is herself, not "because of the teacher", but "despite one". Alla earlier: And the gist of mine is that for the little brats benefit Snape should not be allowed anywhere near them. :-) Irene: Well, his record in exam results and accidents statistics seems to be against this conclusion. IMHO, of course. :-) Alla: Oh? Have you expected Snape to say that he had poor exams record ? Yes, I remember Umbridge saying that his class is advanced, but that is not the only criteria for good teacher as I see it. You mentioned Shaun in this post. We had similar discussions with him. I remember him saying that for some children ( and for him also) Snape like methods worked. That is fine, but I strongly believe that if such teacher manages at the same time severely traumatise some students or even ONE the price of such education is too high. You see, even IF Snape manages to beat into some students or into many students his subject, but at the same time some of his students even ONE will end up.... oh, I don't know, for RL comparison let's say in mental facility as a pure result of his actions , I would NOT consider him to be a good teacher. I think that the best RL solution will be to hire another Potions master in Hogwarts AND ask students who will want to stay in class with Snape. THEN of course students won't have much to complain about, because they chose to stay in his class. My guess will be that not too many will stay though. :-) Yes, I know that we won't have much of a story then. Just my opinion, Alla From lhuntley at fandm.edu Fri Apr 29 21:13:14 2005 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 17:13:14 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: <42729837.5070808@btopenworld.com> References: <42729837.5070808@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: <62e593ee81909625a9213fe4f7a1444c@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 128263 Irene: > That wasn't quite what I meant. In the context of a real-life school, > where somebody like Hermione would be discouraged by her peers from > demonstrating any commitment, strict teacher is much better than a > "nice" but ineffectual one. Er, well. I suppose I agree with you on principle, but I think that principle is sort of blown to bits when the *teacher* in question is actually discouraging a student from demonstrating any commitment. Arguably, Hermione doesn't *need* encouragement to study, but I don't think you can argue that Snape provides an environment that is anything but hostile towards Hermione's commitment to her studies. Heck, he makes fun of her for being a "know-it-all". If the teasing of other kids is bad enough to discourage certain students from academic excellence, imagine what the taunts of a teacher must do! Irene: > If that strict teacher happens to be fair > (McGonagall), that's excellent, but even if he's not, it's still better > than the other choice. I'd say that depends on the extent of his or her unfairness and also the individual temperament of the student in question. Plenty of students can do quite well with nice, ineffective teachers (Hagrid, for instance) if they have the proper resources (textbooks, for example). I think in either case there is a fault in the teacher that the student needs to overcome (hostility in the classroom *will* cripple many children), and how well they do is a function of their personalities. Irene: > Oh, I need Shaun to come to my rescue, he always explains it so much > better than I do. Drat, no. Let him stay away, he's too knowledgeable about all this stuff. ^_~ Anyway, I've never really felt that his arguments apply to Hermione. I believe (emphasis on *believe* -- sorry if I've got it all wrong) that the gist of what he says about Snape is that a percentage of kids will do well with a teacher that is hard on them and tells them they will never be any good, because they can and will rise to the challenge. Now, with Hermione and Snape, I don't get the impression Snape is ever nasty to her for not doing well or not trying hard enough -- on the contrary, I think he's nasty to her for trying *too* hard. While you may *agree* with him on this count (Ron certainly does), I *don't* think it makes him effective in encouraging Hermione to work harder (as if she could!). Irene: > No, he could not care less about the little brats' benefit. :-) It's > just that if in the class of 30 little brats happens to be one or two > capable students, the rest of the brats have to be scared into not > interfering with them. *So* not his job to be picking out the "capable" ones (nevermind that Hermione is certainly capable and Harry and Neville probably are too) and to hell with the rest. He's a school teacher, it's his job to teach *all* the students. And I really, really don't buy the argument that Snape is nasty for the benefit of *anyone* but himself. If anything, I think he is probably jealous of Hermione's aptitude and tries to squash it or ignore it if he can. Irene: > That's a quote from a secondary school pupil during recent BBC > discussion on education: > " All the other students mistreat the teacher and prevent me and my > friends from working adequately." I *get* that, trust me. I *was* that kid. ^_^ Irene: > His teacher seems to be more like Binns than McGonagall, don't you > think? > I think somebody like Snape would be quite high on his list of > alternatives. I really don't think any good, homework-doing, conscientious, hard-working kid would ever *choose* to have Snape as a teacher. Honestly, after being a "good kid" for so long, I don't think he would know what do to about a teacher who was mean to him for no apparent reason. Honestly, it a kid like that who will be more affected by Snape-like treatment than any of the kids he was complaining about. Also, I wouldn't call his current teacher Binns-like at all. I'm not sure there is a Potterverse equivalent to what he is describing, but it seems like his teacher is perfectly competent, just too timid. Alla: >> They >> will understand it when they are older, right? :-) Irene: > Yes, some of them. :-) I guess I would expect the really smart ones among them to grudgingly appreciate it at the time, if it had any value at all. Alla: >> And the gist of mine is that for the little brats benefit Snape >> should not be allowed anywhere near them. :-) Irene: > Well, his record in exam results and accidents statistics seems to be > against this conclusion. IMHO, of course. :-) I'm sorry, technical question: what do we know about his accidents statistics compared to the other potions teachers? Laura From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 21:13:39 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:13:39 -0000 Subject: Half-and-half couples (Was: Unconcerned parents) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128264 > > Carol responds: And no doubt she has Muggle > warning devices like the ones JKR advertises on her site (in the > Rumours section) in case her husband's relatives drop in uninvited for > tea. Chys: I've never seen that, is it new? Or something random? I keep seeing Madam Malkin's advertizements. And something about cheese. Carol: I can't see a "half and half" family living in a Muggle city (how > *did* the Blacks manage to leave the house unseen?), but they couldn't > live in a wizarding community, either. Chys: A half-half might be able to to that, but keep it very low profile. The Dursleys get owls now and then. I don't understand the Blacks in particular, having a house in a muggle area at all. If they're an old family, pureblood and all of that, what's the point in mingling with the 'commonfolk and muddies'? I would have thought they would be more secluded or in a more wizarding territory. This just puzzles me. Carol: (Imagine Mr. Finnegan in Diagon > Alley, assuming that people live as well as work there. And he > obviously doesn't live in Hogsmeade.) So living near a Muggle village > but hidden from view (a la the Weasleys) seems like the only solution, > especially if the Muggle spouse has a job in the Muggle world. And he > or she would want an address that the postman can find. Chys: Lol, I forget the wonders of the Post Office box. Chys From MadameSSnape at aol.com Fri Apr 29 21:16:14 2005 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 17:16:14 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTria... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128265 In a message dated 4/29/2005 2:26:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com writes: I am afraid I don't understand. We are talking about which teacher is the best teacher for Hermione, right? From ALL Hogwarts teachers, correct? So, I would say that Snape is nowhere near on the top of her list, McGonagall should be, IMO. Sherrie: As someone who was VERY much like Hermione in school, I respectfully disagree. A teacher like McG., who might be strict but who I knew liked me, would not challenge me - whereas I would be trying like mad to gain the approval of a teacher like Snape, pushing myself even harder than usual. I've had both sorts - and while I appreciated praise from the McGonagalls, I cherished every nod (even if it was in the form of a lack of negative response) from the Snapes. And I'd usually defend them to my fellow students, just as Hermione does Snape. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 21:21:37 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:21:37 -0000 Subject: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128266 > Karen: Well my opinion is that it doesn't > tell *us*, mere muggles as we are, but I bet it tells Lord V. It he > finds out that that scar is the link between them, I bet that will > tell him all he needs to know about how to kill Harry. I'm pretty > sure Dumbledore is also aware of this. > > I read somewhere that JKR said that the last word in the last book > will be 'scar' and I am of the opinion that it will be something along > the lines of ...and Dumbledore waved his wand said {some funny words} > and removed the scar. > > Karen Chys: I always thought there was something off by that, and LV isn't stupid. (Well, not completely.) He would know when to sit still and let things pass, right? He's very patient. 12 years as a half-ghost proves that. He can wait- so why didn't he wait when the prophecy was concerned, the first time around, did he actually know the part of marking Harry or is this something that's already been discussed. I don't remember if DD said that that was a part that LV knew of or not, but it would make all the difference. You know this would be awfully amusing if all he had to do was posess Harry through their little link, walk him off a cliff, retreat back to himself, and watch him go splat with an amused grin on his scaley face. That last word in the last book idea I have heard before, but I have no idea what that's pertaining to- wasn't the last word in another book scar, or was it 'summer', or 'wake'? *has been spending time at scholastic.com wizard challenge.* Chys From ayaneva at aol.com Fri Apr 29 07:01:18 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 07:01:18 -0000 Subject: The Final Confrontation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128267 Eric Oppen wrote: > > I want to see Lord V _suffer_ first. TK wrote: > Or afterward. See the other thread about how maybe HP and LV > won't actually die, but HP might sacrifice his *magic* to destroy > LV's magic. Thus. Lord Thingy lives out his days as muggle, being > muggly, doing mugglicious things. > > Heh, heh, heh. I think I'm probably alone in this, but the thought of anyone, even Voldie, suffering squicks me. There's been so much suffering already and I'm not too hot on vengeance and torture. I'd rather he just die and call it a day; it would be punishment enough for Voldie because he's so attached to living. Forcing him to live with no magical power would amount to torture. This is the exact reason why I refuse to watch Prophesy III of the Prophecy series of movies (with Christopher Walkin). Evil!Gabriel suffers a similar fate, losing his powers and all that, at the end of Prophesy II and it left such a bitter taste in my mouth because it really was a form of torture in the guise of Devine justice, that I just couldn't stomach anymore. Oh Gabriel and Voldie are quite evil, yes, but I can't take the "eye for an eye" thing. I'd much rather "turn the other cheek!" I wouldn't be much good at all defeating evil. I'd make the fatal mistake of hesitating for too long before casting AK or I wouldn't be able to cast it at all! Like Harry against...Bellatrix, was it? I don't have my books handy. Being an overly forgiving softy has gotten me in trouble a number of times, but I'll take that risk and while, at the time, I was just as mad as Harry for Petigrew's escape, I think Dumbledore was right. That's what differentiates Harry the most: compassion. I'm afraid that after the events of OoTP, he's losing some of that compassion. Everything about that book worries me to no end. AyanEva From tinglinger at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 21:46:15 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:46:15 -0000 Subject: The truth ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128268 gelite --- Yes, I know DD said in SS that Harry will always have the scar, but DD is not infallible and it is clear that he does not understand everything that's going on. greatelderone He is not infallible, but within the realm of the story, all information that he gives to the reader can be viewed as nothing, but the divine words of the writer. So in a nutshell, he can make mistakes of judgement, but not mistakes of fact. tinglinger ------------ The divine words of the writer? I would not always assume that everything Dumbledore says is "true". SS (pg 298 us ed) [Harry speaking..] "sir, there are some other things I'd like to know, if you can tell me... things I want to know the truth about..." "The truth." Dumbledore sighed. "It is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution. However, I shall answer your questions unless I have a very good reason not to, in which case I beg you'll forgive me. I shall not, of course, lie." That little snippetwhich apppears to be the basis of Dumbledores truth telling does NOT mean that Dumbledore will always speak in clear declarative sentences or say something meaningful that can be relied on as truth. For example, when Harry is asking Dumbledore about Tom Riddle at the end of COS (pg 332-333)...... "Unless I am much mistaken [1], he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do, i'm sure..." "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" H arry said, thunderstruck. "It certainly seems [2] so." [1] maybe he WAS much mistaken. [2] "seems" is not the same as "is" YET BOTH SENTENCES ARE TRUE STATEMENTS! Both statements allow for exceptions. It is as if Dumbledore said "Voldemort transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar unless I am not interpreting the facts correctly and he didn't.........." "Voldemort put a bit of himself in me?" Harry said, thunderstruck. "It certainly seems so, but hell, it's as good an explanation as any and better than most!" I am skeptical in my interpretation of any statement where Dumbledore uses the word "seems"; "seems" is not a synonym for "is", and you can be entangled in semantic Devil's Snare if you aren't careful. It is safe to cross the busy intersection. It seems to be safe to cross the busy intersection. or This tax return I prepared for you is correct. This tax return I prepared for you seems to be correct. Which provides a higher degree of certainty? Do you understand what I am saying? You seem to understand what I am saying. Right? tinglinger whose yahoogroup potterplots plays around with semantics all the time, and if you are not antisemantic you should check it out http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 21:57:36 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 21:57:36 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley Theory Extention In-Reply-To: <20050428162503.34412.qmail@web8507.mail.in.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128269 Subhash Sane wrote: > There is something more which I would like to say in detail regarding my theory on Percy Weasley - A Death Eater. > > It doesn't matter whether Percy is good guy or bad guy. It doesn't matter whether Percy is working for Dumbledore or not. He is very very important person from Voldemort's point of view.Voldemort will not kill Percy Weasley because he is an important person. Lucius Malfoy has seen Percy acting against his father. Voldemort is in search of 'new talent'. Naturally, Lucius must have told him about Percy's position. At the end of OOTP, Percy has not come back. He hasn't fully recovered. So, this is the right time to set a trap and get Percy. > > Voldemort's modus operandi is very similar to muggle terrorists. They are excellent talent hunters. They attack the brains of those who don't have anywhere to go. Feeble,weak minds always get intimidated. Still, if that person refuses to join in, they set an emotional trap wherein all other people don't believe him and they desert him completely. Thus, these minds become more feeble having lost the support of their loved ones. And at that point, these terrorist groups give them 'refuge' and 'sympathy'. So, such people become terrorists. This is how terrorists operate and this is how Voldemort operates. > Hence, there will be a trap set by Lord. Again, it doesn't matter whether Percy is good or bad. If Lord wants him so badly on their side, he will do anything for it.Voldemort will not kill Percy, that's for sure. Even if we assume that Percy is acting for Dumbledore, Voldemort would still set the trap. After all, people can be forced to join, emotionally or physically. > > > > a_svirn: There is much in what you are saying about terrorists, but do we have any evidence in canon in favour of your "Voldemort-in-search- for-talents" theory? From what we've seen of his DE, especially in DoM episode they don't strike me as overly bright. Well, it's probably safe to assume that Rockwood must be fairly intelligent, or he wouldn't have been employed as an Unspeakable. But there is that. Even Lucius seems clever only in comparison with the rest of the lot, which isn't saying much. I am not saying that they all are necessarily stupid, just that we have nothing whatsoever to assume that LV is an "excellent talent-hunter". a_svirn From irishwynch at aol.com Fri Apr 29 17:19:09 2005 From: irishwynch at aol.com (irishwynch at aol.com) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:19:09 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Purging the DE ranks and deadly!Sirius (was Re: The boys ... Message-ID: <1db.3abd2c38.2fa3c68d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128270 AyanEva: And there's still the question of how a bunch of kids can best a bunch of fully grown evil wizards. A bit of bad writing, or maybe the DEs were sabotaged by their Master so that their fighting skills would be compromised? Just a thought. Sorry, I know I keep asking questions that probably have no answer, but I'm just dying for a theory Marla now: If I remember correctly, the kids didn't actually "best" the evil wizards, but for the most part kept them at bay until, luckily, the members of the Order arrived and finished the fight. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Apr 29 22:05:25 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:05:25 -0000 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128271 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > Leah; > According to DD, there are two > possible candidates for the job, Neville and Harry, and, having for > his own reasons, selected Harry as the most likely, Voldemort sets > out to destroy him, (and thus fulfills the next part of the > prophecy, and provides the third and final identifier, by marking > Harry). Geoff: Yes, but that presupposes that Voldemort "selected" Harry. How do we now that he didn't decide to attack them both? By chance, he chose Harry first, fired off an Avadra Kedavra at him and "pow, splat, arggh"... the rest is history. Having placed a feline centrally among the avians, retires to a discreet spot to watch developments. :-) From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 29 22:11:39 2005 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:11:39 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Final Confrontation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128272 >There's been so much suffering already >and I'm not too hot on vengeance and torture. I'd rather he just die >and call it a day; it would be punishment enough for Voldie because >he's so attached to living. Forcing him to live with no magical power >would amount to torture. Interestingly enough, there are those who feel that this is an appropriate fate for *Harry.* Whereas I think forcing Harry to live with no magical powers, now that he's had them and they're a part of his life, *would* amount to torture. (Why do you think Filch is so deranged? He has to watch everyone else doing and learning things he can never do, all day long, over and over again. Now think how much worse it would be for Harry, because he *could* once do all those things, if he lost the ability.) But as for Voldemort, there are people who feel that letting him live would be merciful, but only if he's no longer a danger to the world at large. Which means he has to be rendered powerless, because that's the only way to insure that he won't do it all over again in another few decades. (And in fact I'm not sure I'd trust him even then. First of all, Muggles can cause a whole lot of trouble without magic, and I'm sure Voldemort knows this. Second of all, powers that can be removed can possibly be restored.) Hmm. Maybe you're right. For the safety of both worlds, Voldemort should probably die, and his body should be cremated or dissolved in acid (Snape probably knows some good ones) and the acid or ashes should be taken far out to sea and dumped overboard. And until this is done, the body should be under trustworthy guard so it isn't spirited away by Death Eaters. Janet Anderson From a_svirn at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 22:19:14 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:19:14 -0000 Subject: Funerals are for the living In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128273 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" wrote: > Will we finally see Harry at a funeral or wake? > > I been able to come up with a weak story on why Harry didn't go to > Cedric's funeral. It has to do with Harry feeling uncomfortable as he > witnessed it and not wanting to be around Cedric's folks and their > grief. a_svirn: It is conceivable that he wasn't invited. kempermentor: > But I think Harry AND the Order need to have a funeral or a wake. It > doesn't need to be huge. Just a private get together amoung friends > and family. What culture doesn't have a death rite? a_svirn: Ah, but there is the rub. What kind of rites of passage are there in the WW? Do they have priests? Is there any such thing as religion at all for wizards? If yes, do they have the same religions and denominations as Muggles? And how does all this witchcraft busyness come into this? If not, what do they have instead? I believe that JKR has purposely sidestepped the issue so far in order to avoid possible controversy with the Church. There has been enough of that already and she probably doesn't want any more entanglements with the Christian "crusaders". a_svirn From navarro198 at hotmail.com Fri Apr 29 22:54:26 2005 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (Ravenclaw Bookworm) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 22:54:26 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128274 > Carol responds: > I've said this before, so forgive me for repeating, but thoughts are > not stored in a Pensieve. They are placed there by a person capable of > removing them from his own head--an Occlumens. We have so far seen > only two people capable of performing this intricate bit of magic, > Dumbledore and Snape. Snape is not present in the HBP scene, so, > unless Harry has learned to become a "superb Occlumens" in the time > between the end of OoP and the HBP cover scene, the thoughts or > memories are almost certainly Dumbledore's. Bookworm: Could Dumbledore be teaching Harry to use it? Ravenclaw Bookworm From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 23:10:36 2005 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:10:36 -0000 Subject: The Final Confrontation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128275 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AyanEva" wrote: > Eric Oppen wrote: > > > I want to see Lord V _suffer_ first. > > TK wrote: > > Or afterward. See the other thread about how maybe HP and LV > > won't actually die, but HP might sacrifice his *magic* to destroy > > LV's magic. Thus. Lord Thingy lives out his days as muggle, being > > muggly, doing mugglicious things. > > AyanEva: I think I'm probably alone in this, but the thought of > anyone, even Voldie, suffering squicks me. There's been so much > suffering already and I'm not too hot on vengeance and torture. In general, and in life, I agree with you. Suffering in real life tears me apart. I have trouble watching the news. However, the HP books are not life, they are not justice, they are art. To quote: "There are gentle souls who would pronounce *Lolita* meaningless because it does not teach them anything. I am neither a reader nor a writer of didactic fiction, and . . . *Lolita* has no moral in tow. For me a work of fiction exists only insofar as it affords me what I shall bluntly call aesthetic bliss, this is a sense of being somehow, somewhere, connected with other states of being where art (curiousity, tenderness, kindness, ecstasy) is the norm." -- Nabokov I won't patronize you by pointing out that Voldie doesn't really exist and will not live out a life without magic. But sometimes, to make art, bad things must happen. The description of Harry's treatment by the Dursleys in the first book made me crazy with horror. TK -- TigerPatronus From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 23:41:36 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:41:36 -0000 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128276 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" > wrote: > > > Leah; > > According to DD, there are two > > possible candidates for the job, Neville and Harry, and, having for > > his own reasons, selected Harry as the most likely, Voldemort sets > > out to destroy him, (and thus fulfills the next part of the > > prophecy, and provides the third and final identifier, by marking > > Harry). > > Geoff: > Yes, but that presupposes that Voldemort "selected" Harry. How do we > now that he didn't decide to attack them both? By chance, he chose > Harry first, fired off an Avadra Kedavra at him and "pow, splat, > arggh"... the rest is history. > > Having placed a feline centrally among the avians, retires to a > discreet spot to watch developments. > :-) Angie: Thank you both for joining my folly. :) I've thoroughly believe that Voldy intended to kill both boys. He doesn't seem to me to be the type of evil wizard to take chances, not after all the steps he has taken to ensure his immortality. I think we must assume he struck Harry first b/c presumably Neville would be dead if Voldy had reached him first. I think DD is overreaching or misspeaking in stating that DD "chose" Harry b/c he thought Harry was the greater threat to him, etc. And I'm still not convinced that the "marking" is the failed curse scar nor am I certain what it means to be Voldy's "equal." From gelite67 at yahoo.com Fri Apr 29 23:52:00 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:52:00 -0000 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128277 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "littleleahstill" wrote: > Angie wrote: > What the heck did DD mean in OOP when he told Harry that, "He [LV} > set out to kill you when you were still a baby, believing he was > fulfulling the terms of the prophecy. He discovered, to his cost,that > he was mistaken, when the curse intended to kill you backfired." > and in a later post: > "nkafkafi" wrote: > > > Lets look at the prophecy from Voldy's POV. Try to > > forget for a moment that you know the second half, and look only at > > the part that HE knows: > > > > "The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... > born > > to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month > dies..." > > > > > Angie replies: > It just occured to me as I read your post: How could LV think he > was "fulfulling" this prophesy, when it didn't require him to DO > anything? He had nothing to do with the "one" who was approaching. > > Am I being too simplistic or hyper-technical? > > Leah; > Excuse me massively snipping these posts. I've read through the > thread and I don't think Angie has had an answer to something I've > never noticed before and is a really interesting question. By trying to destroy Prophecy Boy, Voldemort is > acting in a long tradition of mythic villains. Perseus, Oedipus, > Jason, Paris, were all prophesied as bringing doom on their fathers > and grandfathers, and were therefore sent away, exposed on mountains > etc in an attempt to defeat the terms of the prophecies ( and of > course thereby bringing about the conditions to fulfill them). But > Perseus' grandfather and the others weren't trying to fulfill the > prophecies, they were trying to prevent that fulfillment, and the > general assumption, I think it's safe to say, is that Voldemort is > also trying to prevent the prophecy from coming true, ie. prevent > his vanquishing, even though his actions in doing so are a mistake > from his point of view. > To fulfill the prophecy by killing Harry, > Harry must be the Dark Lord, and Voldemort the one with the power to > vanquish him. I hope that doesn't make sense. And it doesn't in > terms of the prophecy wording. > > Angie again (who greatly appreciates Leah's post and wonders if anyone has officially been driven crazy by this series!): Thank you, thank you, thank you! I wish I'd said that! That's been nagging at me for a while and I couldn't put it into words. That makes sense, that Voldy was trying to defeat the prophecy. Even though Voldemort hadn't heard the entire prophecy, he knew enough to know that he wanted to get rid of anyone with the power to vanquish him. But I wonder why crafty old JKR didn't have DD just say that, instead, if that was the case? It makes sense that Voldy, (who obviously had never read about Perseus, Oedipus, Jason, or Paris) thought he was fulfulling the "must die" part of the prophecy, but of course it doesn't make sense because he hadn't heard that part of the prophecy yet at the time he tried to kill Harry -- aaaargh! Is there a cure????? From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 00:03:56 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:03:56 -0000 Subject: Foregiveness and Redemption: Lewis, Christianity, JKR, and the Potterverse In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128278 Frankly, I don't believe that JKR is writing from any kind of Christian perspective at all. But let's ? as you say ? for the sake of the argument assume that she is. How does this additional perspective add to our understanding of the series? You say: "Good actions may, of course, be a SIGN of repentence. That is, when one turns from sin one will, naturally, act in a different way. However, the actions THEMSELVES are not the bringers of redemption, and may be misleading. One can perform good acts for many reasons. It may be because of genuine repentence. It may be because of a misguided belief that one can "earn their way into Heaven." It may be as a sign of pride, to prove that one is morally superior to another person. It may be as a form of self-preservation. The acts themselves are irrelevant, as far as the moral status of the person is concerned. What is relevant is the source from which the actions spring. That means that Snape, under this view, can't be evaluated until we have more information. If his actions spring from genuine sorrow and a desire to do good, he is redeemed. If they spring from another reason, EVEN A DESIRE TO EARN REDEMPTION, then he is not a redeemed character. This may not seem fair, but it is the way things run under this kind of belief system. Snape's actions in saving Harry and spying on Voldemort (if that is what he is doing) are not important in and of themselves. What is important is the source of those actions". Well, so far so good, but what if we take "the Christian perspective" out of the equation? Still all that you are saying about relevancy of the source of the actions rather than the actions themselves would hold true. Until we know for sure what Severus is up to (and that would be probably no sooner than in Book 7) we cannot judge whether he is reformed or not. So why do we need this Christianity aspect at all? Why increase the number of entities beyond what is necessary? You write then, that all this stuff about actions and their rationale brings up the question whether it matters at all if a sinner (more commonly known as a bad guy) is sincere in his/her motivations. Your answer is that it doesn't ? because there can only be one truth and one wisdom that God in his infinite mystery ordained. But that's where we step on the shaky ground. There might well be only one truth, but we are certainly NOT God, so how on earth would we know which one is THE one? Or do you mean that JKR presumes to know the answer? Somehow I doubt that she would claim any such thing. It is by far safer to assume that she operates within the certain set of values and the more any HP character deviates from them in his or her behaviour and/or hidden motivations, the less likely it would be that his or her sincerity would be taken into account. And these values are not necessarily ? or exclusively ? Christian. After all Rowling repeatedly told us what she considers important in a person ? bravery, loyalty, ability to love etc. What is particularly Christian about it? Hardly anything, I am afraid. a_svirn From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 00:09:26 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:09:26 -0000 Subject: LV wasn't fulfilling the Prophesy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128279 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" > wrote: > > Angie: > > So, you're saying that whomever "The One" is, he would not have > the > > power to vanquish Voldemort unless Voldemort marked him? A > > conditional prophesy? I don't read the prophecy that way. The > > prophecy doesn't say the One will have the power IF Voldemort > marks > > him as his equal. It says "And." I read that as two separate > > occurrences. The one who has the power to vanquish approaches and > > the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal. > > GEO: We don't know how exactly Harry would vanquish Voldemort yet > with > the powers that he knows not. If however he vanquishes Voldemort > through either the scar or something else that was a result of that > Halloween Day then couldn't we assume that he became the One to > vanquish the Dark Lord only because Voldemort marked him? Angie: Maybe, after the fact. But that's yet to be demonstrated so I don't accept it at this point. :) Angie > > > Yes, I know DD said in SS that Harry will always have the scar, > but > > DD is not infallible and it is clear that he does not understand > > everything that's going on. > > GEO: He is not infallible, but within the realm of the story, all > information that he gives to the reader can be viewed as nothing, > but the divine words of the writer. So in a nutshell, he can make > mistakes of judgement, but not mistakes of fact. Angie: Just because DD knows MORE about what's going on than anyone else, doesn't mean he knows everything or even that what he thinks he knows and understands is accurate. Why can DD not make mistakes of facts like any other character? Examples: Hagrid said that Gringotts was the safest place in the world to keep something except for Hogwarts -- yet Voldemort penetrated both. Griphook (minor character, but the point is the same): said that anyone but a Gringott's goblin tried to open Vault 713, they'd be sucked into the vault and trapped there. Didn't happen. These two examples (which I admit are not of much consequence in the big scheme of things) immediately spring to mind b/c I'm rereading SS right now. It just seems to me that if if JKR's characters, including DD, didn't make mistakes of fact, they wouldn't be human. From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 00:14:59 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:14:59 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ravenclaw Bookworm" wrote: > > Carol responds: > > I've said this before, so forgive me for repeating, but thoughts are > > not stored in a Pensieve. They are placed there by a person capable > of > > removing them from his own head--an Occlumens. We have so far seen > > only two people capable of performing this intricate bit of magic, > > Dumbledore and Snape. Angie: Should we assume that you must be an Occlumens to use a Pensieve? Just because we've only seen Snape and DD do it doesn't mean they are the only ones who can, does it? I don't understand why you would have to be able to discern whether someone else is telling the truth in order to remove your own thoughts. Am I missing something? From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 00:23:17 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:23:17 -0000 Subject: Peeves, Ghosts. and the Common Rooms Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128281 I'm rereading SS and at one point, Harry entes the common room after hearing Snape in the forest with Quirrell. The text says that Harry made sure Peeves wasn't inside before shutting the door. I neve paid attention to that before. I guess Harry could simply be making sure Peeves wasn't around, but that's the only time in the book when he goes to tell R & H something and looks around for Peeves in particular. So it struck me as odd. I know Peeves is not a real ghost but is a poltergeist or a force of chaos, I believe JKR said. Does that mean that Peeves would be "trapped" in the Common Room and couldn't exit if the door was closed? Can he not glide thru walls like the Ghosts can? He can move physical objects, so why not open the door? And come to think of it, have any of the Ghosts ever appeared in their respective Common Rooms? I suppose they could just be giving the students privacy, but somehow, I think not. I only ask because I wonder if this will come into play if (when) Hogwarts is attacked. Angie From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 00:38:42 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:38:42 -0000 Subject: LV's patience Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128282 Chys said: > I always thought there was something off by that, and LV isn't > stupid. (Well, not completely.) He would know when to sit still and > let things pass, right? He's very patient. 12 years as a half-ghost > proves that. He can wait- Bonnie: Excuse me for jumping in here, but how does that prove LV was patient. What choice did he have? He tried many times to get a body (SS/PS, COS). I don't think we can call him patient when he had no choice. Sorry :( From Snarryfan at aol.com Sat Apr 30 00:41:25 2005 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:41:25 -0000 Subject: Snape and teaching and other jobs and how Voldy can torture him. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128283 > Alla wrote: > > I think that the best RL solution will be to hire another Potions > master in Hogwarts AND ask students who will want to stay in class > with Snape. > > THEN of course students won't have much to complain about, because > they chose to stay in his class. > My guess will be that not too many will stay though. :-) > > Yes, I know that we won't have much of a story then. > Well, all the slytherin will be there. And Snape would love it. Maybe he's not making any effort because he want to be fired? *grin* I'm a Snape fan, but I don't think he's a good teacher, anyways not if you're not in his good books. In the same time, I had a teacher like him (which school never had them?) and I never had problem with him, because I was under his radar. If he survive, I hope we'll see him making a big goodbye wave to Hogwart and open his own shop of potion, with the best wolfbanes of the country at a good price. In a completely diferent subject, I had a bunny about a method Voldy uses to make Snape pay. After the usual crucio and more, he lets him live and flee, and promises him his pain just began. LV use his contacts in the MOM to interrogate him, and let him go after saying they did something to make him less dangerous. Snape can't remember what, think they errased all his memories of Dark Arts, realize he still have them, and think they just wanted to scare him. And one day, during a lesson, he forget the name of an ingredient. Later he need a few minute to find the name of a potion. Few days later, he see that he can't read a complicated potion book. He convinces himself he's just tired, but must admit after a important error in class he's forgetting all he know about potion. Little by little, everything is dissapearing of his mind, and he knows it. He try to relearn, but he can't see the words if it's about potions. When all is errased (plus Voldy who play with the Mark when he's bored), Snape is scared to death that now he's useless, because he can't spy anymore, can't make the Wolfbane, can't even make something Neville can do without thinking, DD will throw him him out of Hogwart, that his views on the feelings are right and that DD absolutely doesn't care about him, and will stop helping him now that he can't repay him. LV found funnier to make Snape become slowly crazy, in playing with his weakness that he know, because he already used them when Snape enter the DEs, and Snape still has them: his big insecurities hidden behind his mega complex of superiority. Christelle From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 00:47:25 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 00:47:25 -0000 Subject: Watching out for Peeves Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128284 Angie (I believe, sorry) asks: I'm rereading SS and at one point, Harry entes the common room after hearing Snape in the forest with Quirrell. The text says that Harry made sure Peeves wasn't inside before shutting the door. Bonnie now: I assumed he looked for Peeves because no one in their right mind would want to be in a room with Peeves if they could help it. He closed the door so no one else could hear. (other students or teachers). I think I take things to literally. Bonnie From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sat Apr 30 01:21:00 2005 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 11:21:00 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: <62e593ee81909625a9213fe4f7a1444c@fandm.edu> References: <42729837.5070808@btopenworld.com> Message-ID: <42736A1C.4821.48EB157@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 128285 On 29 Apr 2005 at 17:13, Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote: > Irene: > > That wasn't quite what I meant. In the context of a real-life > > school, where somebody like Hermione would be discouraged by her > > peers from demonstrating any commitment, strict teacher is much > > better than a "nice" but ineffectual one. > > Er, well. I suppose I agree with you on principle, but I think that > principle is sort of blown to bits when the *teacher* in question is > actually discouraging a student from demonstrating any commitment. > Arguably, Hermione doesn't *need* encouragement to study, but I don't > think you can argue that Snape provides an environment that is > anything but hostile towards Hermione's commitment to her studies. > Heck, he makes fun of her for being a "know-it-all". If the teasing > of other kids is bad enough to discourage certain students from > academic excellence, imagine what the taunts of a teacher must do! > > Irene: > > If that strict teacher happens to be fair > > (McGonagall), that's excellent, but even if he's not, it's still > > better than the other choice. > > I'd say that depends on the extent of his or her unfairness and also > the individual temperament of the student in question. Plenty of > students can do quite well with nice, ineffective teachers (Hagrid, > for instance) if they have the proper resources (textbooks, for > example). I think in either case there is a fault in the teacher that > the student needs to overcome (hostility in the classroom *will* > cripple many children), and how well they do is a function of their > personalities. > > Irene: > > Oh, I need Shaun to come to my rescue, he always explains it so much > > better than I do. > > Laura. > Drat, no. Let him stay away, he's too knowledgeable about all this > stuff. ^_~ Anyway, I've never really felt that his arguments apply > to Hermione. I believe (emphasis on *believe* -- sorry if I've got it > all wrong) that the gist of what he says about Snape is that a > percentage of kids will do well with a teacher that is hard on them > and tells them they will never be any good, because they can and will > rise to the challenge. Now, with Hermione and Snape, I don't get the > impression Snape is ever nasty to her for not doing well or not trying > hard enough -- on the contrary, I think he's nasty to her for trying > *too* hard. While you may *agree* with him on this count (Ron > certainly does), I *don't* think it makes him effective in encouraging > Hermione to work harder (as if she could!). Shaun: Sorry Laura, now my name has been invoked, I cannot stay away. (-8 In simple terms, I think you and Irene are both making points I agree with. And your paraphrase of (one of) my position(s) with regards to Snape is accurate (I would have phrased things a little differently, but it's pretty close to what I believe). But I am certainly not certain that Hermione derives any great benefit from Snape's classes - she *might* do so, but it's by no means certain in my view. All right, let's see how I can lay out my position on this. Where I'm coming from is someone who went to a number of different schools and who fared very badly in 'modern' schools with all the modern touchy-feely-let's-worry-about-self-esteem-above-all-else- academics-aren't-important-teachers-should-be-nice ideas, and who did extremely well in 'highly traditional' you-kids-are-here-to-learn-and- we-don't-care-at-all-what-we-need-to-do-to-make-that-happen ideas. I've no fundamental problems with modern educational ideas - I think they work well for a lot of kids and where they work, I'm very glad to see them being used. What I object to is the idea that seems to develop that new ideas are inherently better than old ones, and that new philosophies of education should replace traditional philosophies. In my view, there's no need for that to happen - both can co-exist. Because of this, I tend to get rather frustrated when I see people attacking the methods of teaching used at Hogwarts seemingly on the basis that they are old fashioned traditional methods. They are certainly open to criticism - but I don't think it's valid to attack a school and its methods simply because they aren't the methods a particular person is used to. Because there's more than one 'good' way. Just because there are some good new ideas, doesn't automatically mean the old ways were wrong, or bad. Both types of teaching work for some kids, and both types don't work for some kids. I'll even concede that in general terms, I think the modern methods done well probably work better in more cases - I just don't like it when people go so far as to dismiss the old methods. Now Hogwarts as presented in the books seems to be a highly traditional school using highly traditional methods of teaching. In my view, the main reason for this is most likely that JKR wanted to make use of the British boarding school literature traditions as presented in literally thousands of books written and published in the 19th and 20th century. Making use of a particularly literary tradition allows an author to 'take shortcuts' in writing. You start with a set of understandings and assumptions which you can then tweak to match what you need. You can then create something that is unique when it comes to the important details, without having to obsessively create all the background details from scratch. She's drawing on the traditions of a massive corpus of work - and, in my view, as someone who grew up reading such books (and who still collects and reads them to this day) she's done it very well. Hogwarts is unique - but it's in touch with a rich literary tradition. So the school is traditional - all the teachers seem to use traditional teaching methods and have traditional educational ideas. One of the major ideas that falls into those methods is the idea that a teachers job is to impart knowledge to students. Teachers do not have to be nice. Teachers do not have to be kind. Teachers do not even have to be emotionally stable. None of those things are relevant to their abilities as teachers - because a teachers job is to teach. In such an environment, with such understandings, you assess whether or not a teacher is successful, based on whether or not their students know what the teacher has taught them. Nothing else is relevant. (At least not in their role as a classroom teacher... teachers can have other responsibilities besides teaching in such a school - for example, Snape is head of a house at Hogwarts - and that position means that he does have some particular and special responsibility for the welfare of the children in that house that goes beyond their classroom learning. But he doesn't have it for anyone else. If we had signs that Snape was abusive towards Slytherin's, that would be a black mark against him in my view - but we don't have signs of that. Indeed what information we have (and I'm not by any means convinced it is entirely accurate) suggests that he treats Slytherins 'better' than other students. There are also some things that do fall into a category that *any* teacher should deal with appropriately - Hermione's teeth incident is the one thing about Snape that I find absolutely reprehensible - because all teachers do have a basic and fundamental duty to deal with a medical emergency - he didn't need to do much, but that comment was uncalled for. But I digress). My point is two fold. Some kids do learn best in very traditional environments when information and knowledge is simply presented and expected to be picked up. The attitudes of the teacher are largely irrelevant to these kids - sure, it can be a bonus if the teacher is nicer, but it doesn't really matter. And for many of them, they don't really want anything else. They just want to learn. They don't want teachers trying to get to know them, trying to be their friends, trying to make every class a happy place. Others may not enjoy the class - but they still may learn very well in it - and that's the bottom line. When it comes to Snape, we have no reason to suppose that *in general* his students do poorly. Without that information, we can't really assess whether or not he is a 'good' teacher where the criteria is simply ability to teach. I'm hoping we might get some information on this in passing in 'Half-Blood Prince' - because for the OWLs, students were externally assessed. If it somehow emerges that everybody did well in potions (or even did adequately) then we will have a clear indication that Snape is a generally good teacher by that one criteria. (When it comes to specific students, we do have some indication that Snape doesn't do well. I think Snape's personal and visceral hatred of Harry means he cannot teach Harry as effectively as he might otherwise do so. And I think Neville is one of those kids for whom Snape's style is simply wrong. But even the best teacher can have failures with some kids.) I can say that I learned very effectively with Snape-like teachers, and years on, I'm very glad I had them. Only one was really as bad as Snape - and he may have been the best teacher I ever had in a lot of ways (not because of his methods - he was just a naturally brilliant teacher at his core, I think.) Now... Hermione specifically. Do I think Hermione benefits from a teacher like Snape? Yes. Do I think Hermione specifically benefits from a teacher like Snape? No. There's a distinction. I work with gifted kids. I've been doing so for years. While every gifted kid differs in some ways, there are certain common characteristics that large numbers of them have in differing amounts. Hermione, to me, seems very much to fit into the mould of a highly motivated exceptionally or profoundly gifted child. (Harry, by the way, just for the record seems to fit into the mould of a normally motivated moderately gifted child - he's not an underachiever, by any means, but he doesn't set out to do very well either - if he sets his mind to something though, with effort, he can do it.) As a matter of simple fact, most EG and PG kids do not do that well in modern education. This isn't because modern educational methods are inherently bad for such kids - it's just that modern education often includes ideas tacked onto it that work out being bad for gifted children (when those ideas are discarded, a lot of modern teaching actually works very well for such kids). I don't want to go into all that here - but it's a commonly observed problem. Large numbers of these kids (but by no means all) do well in traditional learning environments for a number of reasons, which again I won't go into here (if people want to discuss these things, I'm happy to go into them on OT-Chatter, so people can tell me why I'm wrong). We don't know about Hermione's education prior to Hogwarts - but I'm inclined to think she was lucky enough to be in a place where she got most of what she needed, but probably not quite everything - not a bad environment, just not ideal. That assessment is based on my experience of such gifted kids who seem like Hermione - at age 11, she hasn't given up on education (which means her experiences probably weren't that bad) but she does seem incredibly eager to embrace new things at Hogwarts (which suggests she is finding challenge at Hogwarts she has never had before). That's speculation - but informed speculation. And for such a child, the Snape classroom is actually a pretty good one. A classroom where you don't have to worry about peripheral issues - one where you just sit down, shut up, and learn. The teacher doesn't coddle anyone - he just starts teaching and expects people to keep up. High standards, rigorous learning. That probably is a good environment for Hermione if, as I think she does, she fits the high motivation EG/PG child model. However, for such children, there's a lot of other environments that work well as well. These are the kids who learn easily in any credible teaching environment. Hermione may learn from Snape - but she probably also learns equally well from McGonnagal, Sprout, and Flitwick. She learns from Binns (and to me, Binns does seem to be a pretty mediocre teacher in a lot of ways). She even managed to learn from Lockhart (though what he was teaching wasn't much use). Hermione could learn in just about any classroom - as long as the teacher is teaching something concrete. Bad teachers from Hermione - well, Trelawney is the prime example. Trelawney (to me) seems to be the teacher who most fits into 'modern' educational ideas - she's a very poor fit for them, she almost seems to have embraced the bad parts without managing to take on any of the positives. She seems to me to be (for the most part) a nice enough lady, fairly calm, fairly gentle - but she's probably close to an ideal example of how that isn't enough to be a decent teacher. Her subject is very wooly, her teaching style seems non-existent. She doesn't like Hermione, probably because she realises Hermione sees right through her, and realises she isn't actually teaching anything. In fairness to Trelawney, it seems to me that Divination is probably largely things that can't be taught, so its hard to be harsh about the fact she's not teaching well. But she's an example of the type of teacher who is wrong for Hermione. And Hermione knows it. Umbridge is probably somewhat similar. It's not that the knowledge obtained in her class doesn't have some value - it's just she doesn't teach at all. She simply gets kids to read. Again, this is the type of classroom that is bad for Hermione. I suppose my point is that Hermione probably does learn well from Snape - she probably learns very well from Snape, in fact. *But* she also learns well from other teachers. I think Irene is right in that in many (not all) modern real-life schools Hermione would be discouraged from learning - I constantly see gifted kids who this has happened to and came very close to being one myself - discouraged by her peers and even by teachers from reaching her potential. And that classes with Snape probably are a better thing for her than such a school. *BUT* I think that is because of the traditions and ethos of Hogwarts as a whole - not specifically because of Snape. He is part of it. But so is McGonagall. So is Flitwick. So is Sprout. It's a different, traditional, form of education. The whole school is. And while teachers like Snape play a role in that - so do teachers like McGonagall, teachers like Sprout, Binns, Flitwick, Lupin, Moody(Crouch)... all teachers who seem to put learning first. They don't necessarily ignore other things - it's just they are not the first priority. I think Snape is probably an effective teacher. But there's plenty of effective teachers at Hogwarts. 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 stix4141 at hotmail.com Sat Apr 30 02:01:56 2005 From: stix4141 at hotmail.com (stickbook41) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 02:01:56 -0000 Subject: Sirius & the 2 Book Rule (was: Funerals are for the living) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128286 Kemper: But Harry needs a good cry in a safe situation where others may be feeling similarly about needless loss. stickbook: The phrase "needless loss" struck me oddly. Was Sirius's tumble through the Veil needless? One of things I like best about these books is that almost nothing is waste (I'm thinking of one particularly obscure passage in GoF about Harry looking out a window and seeing an eagle owl fly by, but I can't find the dratted page!), which helps the author keep Harry, as well as the rest of us, on a need-to-know basis. Like Harry, I still have a hard time believing Sirius is gone; and since JKR rightly insists on sticking to her rule about the dead staying dead, perhaps *the fact that Sirius died* will be very important--much more so than a tool to introduce Harry (and us) to the concept of the Veil. I would much rather see it pan out that Sirius's death significantly enables something that helps Harry defeat Voldemort (as opposed to coming back as a ghost or whatever), so that his loss is not needless in the slightest. But given the 2-book rule (as TigerPatronus pointed out in the insightful post 128202) we may have to wait until Book 7 to see Sirius's death come to any real fruition. Crumbs!! -stickbook From greatelderone at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 03:07:10 2005 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 03:07:10 -0000 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128287 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > Angie: > I think we must assume he struck Harry first b/c presumably Neville > would be dead if Voldy had reached him first. I think DD is > overreaching or misspeaking in stating that DD "chose" Harry b/c he > thought Harry was the greater threat to him, etc. GEO: JKR agrees with Dumbledore on the matter so I for one have choice, but to believe that Dumbledore was right on this little issue besides we know Voldemort wasn't looking for the Longbottoms since DD's spy within the Death Eaters had told him that Voldemort was specifically looking for the Potters which is why they went into hiding in the first place. JK Rowling's World Book Day Chat, March 4, 2004 book: Why did Voldemort pick Harry and not Neville? JK Rowling replies -> Dumbledore explains this in 'Order of the Phoenix'. Voldemort identified more with the half-blood boy and therefore decided he must be the greater risk. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2004/0304-wbd.htm > Angie: > > Just because DD knows MORE about what's going on than anyone else, > doesn't mean he knows everything or even that what he thinks he knows > and understands is accurate. Why can DD not make mistakes of facts > like any other character? GEO: Because anytime when it's Dumbledore or Hermione giving us the facts, it's Rowling feeding information directly to her readers. Mzimba, Lizo, moderator. Interview with Steve Kloves and J.K. Rowling, February 2003. JKR: Absolutely right, I find that all the time in the book, if you need to tell your readers something just put it in her. There are only two characters that you can put it convincingly into their dialogue. One is Hermione, the other is Dumbledore. In both cases you accept, it's plausible that they have, well Dumbledore knows pretty much everything anyway, but that Hermione has read it somewhere. So, she's handy.... Lizo: Does Dumbledore speak for you? JKR: Oh yes, very much so. Dumbledore often speaks for me. http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2003/0302-newsround- mzimba.htm > It just seems to me that if if JKR's characters, > including DD, didn't make mistakes of fact, they wouldn't be human. GEO: Dumbledore has already been proven to be fallible and extremely human due to his mistakes regarding Sirius, Snape and Harry and frankly the mistakes in judgement are usually the ones that are the worst. From coriolan at worldnet.att.net Sat Apr 30 03:31:18 2005 From: coriolan at worldnet.att.net (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 03:31:18 -0000 Subject: FILK: Why Summon Brains? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128288 Why Summon Brains? (OOP, Chap. 35) To the tune of CCR's Who'll Stop the Rain http://ynucc.yeungnam.ac.kr/~bwlee/ccrmidi.htm A/N: If some of the following rhymes seem a little dodgy, just remember that the original song thinks it can rhyme "storm" with "grow", "sun" and "ears" with "rain," etc. THE SCENE: The Brain Room of the DOM. A pixilated RON WEASLEY deals with some cerebral issues. RON: Last thing I remember DEs were chasin' us Through the Mystery's planets Pluto and Uranus Now I'm acting funny Luna says, "Insane" Still, I'll summon Yes, I'll summon Somebody's brain They struck down Ginerva, Broken ankle we heard crack Now I act unstable Amidst further attacks >From a tank of water Colored a deep green I will summon Yes, I'll summon Somebody's brain See the brain a-flyin' Wrapped around my arms The DEs stopped to stare at My D-O-M Brainstorm Feelers keep a-crawlin' Spinnin' round my frame And I wonder, Still I wonder Why summon brains? - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From gelite67 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 03:36:24 2005 From: gelite67 at yahoo.com (gelite67) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 03:36:24 -0000 Subject: Watching out for Peeves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128289 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote: > Angie (I believe, sorry) asks: > > I'm rereading SS and at one point, Harry entes the common room after > hearing Snape in the forest with Quirrell. The text says that Harry > made sure Peeves wasn't inside before shutting the door. > > Bonnie now: > > I assumed he looked for Peeves because no one in their right mind > would want to be in a room with Peeves if they could help it. He > closed the door so no one else could hear. (other students or > teachers). > > I think I take things to literally. > > Angie again: But why only then does he look out especially for Peeves when he doesn't elsewhere in the book? Everyone else was in the common room celebrating the Quidditch victory over Hufflepuff. There was no way they were going to be overheard. And besides, I think Peeves can make himself invisible, can't he? (I remember one time when someone order Peeves to show himself). So there's no guarantee that just because you can't see him that he's not there. Don't worry. If you take things too literally, I'm holding down the other end of the spectrum (reading something into the text) very nicely, thank you. So between the two of us, we're quite balanced! :) From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 05:10:30 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 05:10:30 -0000 Subject: Whose Pensieve on HBP Cover? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128290 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" wrote: > > Should we assume that you must be an Occlumens to use a Pensieve? Just because we've only seen Snape and DD do it doesn't mean they are the only ones who can, does it? Tonks: I suspect that you have to be rather advanced, but probably not an Occlumens to use the pensive. I like the idea that DD is teaching Harry how to use it. If that is the case, maybe baby Harry's memories are what they are looking at. As a baby Harry would not have understood what he was seeing, but now he could. If that is how the thing works it would be quite remarkable. Very remarkable indeed. As I understand it a baby only has sensations, not actual pictures or sounds. So it would be some act of magic to take a babies memories and make it available so that a teenage and adult could understand it. Sound exciting!! Tonks_op From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 05:21:12 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 05:21:12 -0000 Subject: Funerals are for the living In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128291 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_svirn" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kempermentor" > wrote: > > Ah, but there is the rub. What kind of rites of passage are there in > the WW? Do they have priests? Is there any such thing as religion at > all for wizards? If yes, do they have the same religions and > denominations as Muggles? And how does all this witchcraft busyness come into this? If not, what do they have instead? I believe that JKR has purposely sidestepped the issue so far in order to avoid possible controversy with the Church. Tonks: I think that religion is very quitely in the background. They observe Christmas and Easter. Pagan wizards would not do that. And JKR is not afraid of the Church. She has smuggled religion into the US schools!! But not many people know it because they do not understand the symbols that they are reading. JKR has the Hogwarts motto "never tickle a sleeping dragon" for a reason. And I for one just love it!!! Right under the noses of all the "keep religion out of the schools" people. And it help that the Religous Right are opposed to it. I just chuckle. JKR is smuggling God folks!! She is teaching the children basic Christian truths, and most don't even know it. Tonks_op From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 05:24:47 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 05:24:47 -0000 Subject: Watching out for Peeves Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128292 > Angie again: > But why only then does he look out especially for Peeves when he > doesn't elsewhere in the book? Everyone else was in the common room > celebrating the Quidditch victory over Hufflepuff. There was no way > they were going to be overheard. And besides, I think Peeves can > make himself invisible, can't he? (I remember one time when someone > order Peeves to show himself). So there's no guarantee that just > because you can't see him that he's not there. > Don't worry. If you take things too literally, I'm holding down the > other end of the spectrum (reading something into the text) very > nicely, thank you. So between the two of us, we're quite > balanced! :) Bonnie now: I have a hard time picturing Peeves being quiet and invisible for very long. He likes trouble and attention too much. However, you may have a point there. Harry does seem particularly paranoid. Thank you for suggesting I'm at least partly balanced. Most of the people I know think it's crazy for a ???? year old woman to like Harry Potter. Oh well. I'm having fun. Bonnie From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 05:33:40 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 05:33:40 -0000 Subject: The truth ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128293 I would not always assume that everything Dumbledore says is "true". > Snip)> > That little snippetwhich apppears to be the basis of Dumbledores truth telling does NOT mean that Dumbledore will always speak in clear declarative sentences or say something meaningful that can be relied on as truth. (snip)> > I am skeptical in my interpretation of any statement where Dumbledore uses the word "seems"; "seems" is not a synonym for "is", and you can be entangled in semantic Devil's Snare if you aren't careful. > > It is safe to cross the busy intersection. > It seems to be safe to cross the busy intersection. > Tonks: You may be right. I am one of those people that always have to be right. And like DD I try never to lie, but will withhold the truth. So if I am 100% sure of something I will make a statement that shows that. But if I am not sure, I will do the same as DD with the "I think", or "it seems", "some folks have said", etc. SO I have an out if (God forbid) I am wrong. Since I didn't make an explicit statement of fact, then my being "always right" still stands. So DD *could* be doing the same. ;-) Tonks_op From someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au Sat Apr 30 05:40:30 2005 From: someoneofsomeplace at yahoo.com.au (Someone) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 05:40:30 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128294 > SSSusan mused: > Hmmm. Can others who're more well versed in the law in other nations > (particularly in the UK) let us know whether the oft-stated-in- America > remark, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" holds? > > "I was young, I didn't know any better" would not, methinks, get a > person very far in a court of law, especially when the young person > was, presumably, of legal age, even if just barely so. > > Just a thought. > John: I live all the way down here in Australia, the legal system of which is based on the UK's, and, yes, those same sentiments tend to hold here as well. A rather better excuse would be required, I'm afraid. John. From tinglinger at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 06:05:58 2005 From: tinglinger at yahoo.com (tinglinger) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:05:58 -0000 Subject: The truth ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128295 tinglinger I am skeptical in my interpretation of any statement where Dumbledore uses the word "seems"; "seems" is not a synonym for "is", and you can be entangled in semantic Devil's Snare if you aren't careful. It is safe to cross the busy intersection. It seems to be safe to cross the busy intersection. Tonks: You may be right. I am one of those people that always have to be right. And like DD I try never to lie, but will withhold the truth. So if I am 100% sure of something I will make a statement that shows that. But if I am not sure, I will do the same as DD with the "I think", or "it seems", "some folks have said", etc. SO I have an out if (God forbid) I am wrong. Since I didn't make an explicit statement of fact, then my being "always right" still stands. So DD *could* be doing the same. ;-) tinglinger: and if you still are uncertain about the difference, please consider this little snippet from page 10 of the american edition of SS: [McGonagall] threw a sharp, sideways glance at Dumbledore here, as though hoping he was going to tell her something, but he didn't, so she went on. "A fine thing it would be if, on the very day You-Know-Who seems to have disappeared at last, the Muggles found out about us all. I suppose he really has gone, Dumbledore?" "It certainly seems so," said Dumbledore. .... I bet even Bagman wouldn't bet on that, Albus ...... tinglinger who has a yahoogroup called potterplots, that seems to present interesting theories .... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/potterplots From karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk Sat Apr 30 06:30:53 2005 From: karenabarker at yahoo.co.uk (Karen Barker) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:30:53 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker and Trial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128296 > SSSusan wrote: > Hmmm. Can others who're more well versed in the law in other > nations (particularly in the UK) let us know whether the oft-stated- > in-America remark, "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" holds? Karen: Oh yes, "Ignorance is no defence against the Law" in Britain too. Don't forget that the bones of your laws are based on our legal system LOL! When I read the phrasing of the charges though, they didn't seem particularly 'British' to me though - not that I'm a solicitor or anything! I'm wondering if they will try him under WW law, which will be extremely difficult seeing as we don't know that much about it, other than you seem to be tried in front of the whole 'government' rather than a jury of your peers - thank God that doesn't apply in the RW!! - and that a character reference from the 'right' person will get you off of just about anything! (Snape, Hagrid having been vouched for by DD) Karen From hpfans at mamakelsy.net Fri Apr 29 23:54:05 2005 From: hpfans at mamakelsy.net (Kelsy) Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2005 19:54:05 -0400 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) References: Message-ID: <05ee01c54d16$b9d1c980$dd00000a@kelsy> No: HPFGUIDX 128297 Angie: > I think we must assume he struck Harry first b/c presumably Neville > would be dead if Voldy had reached him first. I think DD is > overreaching or misspeaking in stating that DD "chose" Harry b/c he > thought Harry was the greater threat to him, etc. And I'm still > not convinced that the "marking" is the failed curse scar nor am I > certain what it means to be Voldy's "equal." Did you ever think that the reason that Neville's parents are in the hospital is they were the first ones to be attacked. Maybe when James and Lily went into hiding they had both Neville and Harry with them. Maybe James was holding LV (sorry can't spell it correctly) off so that Lily could get the boys hidden. Lily might have gotten Neville into the hiding place and was about to get Harry there, but LV got into the room first. Effectively stopping Lily from hiding Harry with Neville or she would expose both of them to LV. There is the missing day that is not accounted for after the attack. Hagrid could have very well retrieved both boys from the ruins. Taken Neville to his Grandmother and then delivered Harry to the Dursleys in the same time frame and not really alter the facts that we have of that day. Just my 2 cents Kelsy From Snarryfan at aol.com Sat Apr 30 09:45:25 2005 From: Snarryfan at aol.com (evita2fr) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 09:45:25 -0000 Subject: Watching out for Peeves In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128298 > > Angie (I believe, sorry) asks: > > I'm rereading SS and at one point, Harry entes the common room after hearing Snape in the forest with Quirrell. The text says hat Harry made sure Peeves wasn't inside before shutting the door. But why only then does he look out especially for Peeves when he > doesn't elsewhere in the book? Everyone else was in the common room > celebrating the Quidditch victory over Hufflepuff. There was no way > they were going to be overheard. And besides, I think Peeves can > make himself invisible, can't he? (I remember one time when someone > order Peeves to show himself). So there's no guarantee that just > because you can't see him that he's not there. > Harry looks around because they're not in the common room. He goes search Hermione and Ron in and then: "Let's find an empty room, you wait 'til you hear this..." I suppose they're in an empty classroom. Christelle From sally_waddle at hotmail.com Sat Apr 30 05:10:30 2005 From: sally_waddle at hotmail.com (frnsic1) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 05:10:30 -0000 Subject: Rights of goblins and other magical creatures Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128299 In a re-read of OotP, I noticed Mr. Weasley and Lupin discussing Goblin rights (p. 85 US): "'...if they're offered freedoms we've been denying them for centuries they're going to be tempted [to assist Voldemort].'" What freedoms could wizards and the MoM deny creatures such as goblins? What could goblins gain from obeying the "rules" of wizards? I understand that house-elves "enjoy" serving wizarding families (and that they can and do use their own brand of magic, which, in many ways is superior to the magic that wizards are capable of), and the centaurs consider themselves superior and prefer to be left alone, but goblin freedom does not seem to have been explained much in canon. Any ideas??? frnsic... From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Apr 30 09:56:26 2005 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 05:56:26 EDT Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Funerals are for the living Message-ID: <1c4.276db400.2fa4b04a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128300 In a message dated 4/30/2005 1:21:48 AM Eastern Daylight Time, tonks_op at yahoo.com writes: I think that religion is very quitely in the background. They observe Christmas and Easter. Pagan wizards would not do that. ============= Sherrie here: What? Not observe Yule and Ostara???? Never happen. Yes, the Hogwarts school calendar has "holidays" (vacations, to us Yanks & Rebs) over those two particular time frames - but IMHO, it's more to keep them in synch with the "normal" school calendar in the UK. After all, it might raise awkward questions in a community if it were noticed that a child who is supposedly merely away at a boarding school didn't appear at home during the "normal" school breaks. We never see any sort of religious ceremony or display - everything we see is secular rather than sectarian in nature. Yes, gifts are exchanged at Christmas, but that happens at Yule and Chanukah, too; and many of the symbols we see (trees, eggs, &c., e.g.) are, if not universal, at least shared between Paganism and Christianity, and have basically passed completely into the secular realm. IMHO, JKR isn't "smuggling" any sort of religion into US or any other schools - the holidays we see are patently secular observances of the holidays, not religious observances of the holy days. Just my 2 Knuts - as always, YMMV. Sherrie (who's had this discussion with a professor of comparative religion who also happens to be a Lutheran minister with ties to Pagan, Buddhist, Jewish, Muslim and Longhouse faith communities - and a Potterite) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ayaneva at aol.com Sat Apr 30 06:22:16 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:22:16 -0000 Subject: Kids v DEs / Mean Teachers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128301 AyanEva: > And there's still the question of how a bunch of kids can best a > bunch of fully grown evil wizards. Betsy: > But the kids *didn't* best the wizards. Every single one of them > was down, Harry was surrounded, Neville was in the middle of being > tortured by Bellatrix, and Harry was just about to hand over the > prophecy in order to stop Neville being tortured (though I doubt > Bellatrix would have stopped) when Order wizards came streaming to > the rescue. (OotP Scholastic hardback p.801) AyanEva: You know, that's so true. For some reason I always remember it differently and unfortunately, I don't have my books here (they're two states away at home). I think it's because the kids did better than I expected them to. I always assume that the DEs will just wipe the floor with anyone that they run across. If I was an evil guy, that's how I'd train my minions. They'd be like the magical version of some Jet Li/Jacki Chan karate masters or something. ------------------------------------------------ Irene wrote in post 128260: That wasn't quite what I meant. In the context of a real-life school, where somebody like Hermione would be discouraged by her peers from demonstrating any commitment, strict teacher is much better than a "nice" but ineffectual one. If that strict teacher happens to be fair (McGonagall), that's excellent, but even if he's not, it's still better than the other choice. Oh, I need Shaun to come to my rescue, he always explains it so much better than I do. AyanEva: I agree whole heartedly. Some of the classes that I learned the most in were taught by teachers who were, without a doubt, some of the meanest teachers on the Earth. Seriously, a couple even made me cry in elementary school, hurt my feelings in middle school, and infuriated me to the point of tears in high school. In college I had some similar professors with whom I used to get into full-blown e-mail arguments. Lots of snarky, short responses and all, but I learned the material better than the rest of the class just to spite them. I remember what they taught more so than many of the really nice teachers who taught really easy classes. The mean professors aren't out to coddle the students and make friends: Their job is to force the student to learn, whether they want to or not, and that's what they do. I've always understood that and I've never complained once. In fact, I appreciate their efforts the most! I'm talking short-tempered instructors who didn't hesitate to goad, make fun of, belittle, and insult the students every so often. Not so often as Snape, but often enough. Yup, I had a few like that and spent a number of times in the bathroom crying in elementary school, but I always got A's in my classes. It's not like this was old school teaching either, this was the 90s and...whatever the 2000's are called. I'd rather have Snape or McGonagal as a teacher than Trelawney. I can deal with mean and snarky, but not totally batty. It was unpleasant at times and there are teachers and professors that I'd love to back a car over, but it was worth it and I stayed on the honor roll through middle and high school and graduated cum laude from college. I want to be pushed and challenged. The harder you push me, the better I'll perform. Give me your best shot! AyanEva From ayaneva at aol.com Sat Apr 30 06:40:44 2005 From: ayaneva at aol.com (AyanEva) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 06:40:44 -0000 Subject: Sin/Redemption & Snape / Christianity in HP (was: Funerals are for the living) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128302 Lupinlore in post 128255 says: What if a person is not penitent because they genuinely feel they are not wrong? This applies perhaps more to Percy than to Snape. Shouldn't Percy (or Seamus or Cho or even Umbridge) get a break if they honestly believe themselves to be in the right? The answer, in this perspective, is a flat NO. There are two realizations that lead to the beginning of wisdom. 1. There is a God. 2. You ain't Him. Your own understanding is not important. What is important is whether you are acting in accordance with God's edicts. The Court of God has no appeal, no rules of equity, and no patience for arguments about technicalities or interpretations. AyanEva: Ok. I'm really hoping this doesn't come off as an attack on Christianity because it's NOT AN ATTACK at all! I just want to make that clear. I'm just having some trouble understanding the applicability of Christianity to the Harry Potter books, that's all. I've read every post on this, but I'm still befuddled. So, please bear with me and keep in mind that it's not my intention to make anyone mad or offend people. These are honest questions that really are related to the Harry Potter series as a whole. I'll admit that I'm not a Christian because Christianity confuses the crap out of me, but the sin/repentence thing hardly seems fair or very logical. This train of thought will get to Harry Potter in a hot second, by the way, but bear with me for a little bit and let's hope I don't derail completely. In regards to sin/redemption, if a person thinks that they're right, then they don't know that they're wrong. How can you be punished for being wrong if you never knew you were wrong in the first place because you didn't know what was actually right? I can't remember the Bible ever being too clear about these things, but my Bible has a thick layer of dust on it, so it's entirely possible that I've forgotten. Someone please explain this logic gap? I'm really struggling with this one. :-( How can you act in accordance to God's edicts when the edicts are so terribly vague and contradictory, especially considering that the Old and New Testaments don't really match, since one was actually supposed to replace the other? In which case, can we even apply to Harry Potter a morality and theme that not everyone will understand? Otherwise, wouldn't the books come off as kind of evangelical? That doesn't fit with the fact that no religion is mentioned. Christmas doesn't count because the date pre-dates Christianity and it's the Winter Solstice anyway; and the birthday of some guy who killed a bull and stepped on a snake whose name I can't remember. I'm pretty sure there were some stars and a moon or something involved too, but that's beside the point. I'm sure there are a couple of Buddhists, Scientologists, or Zoroastrians reading the books that would be just as thrown off by the applicability of certain Christian ideas as I am. Does anyone know if JKR is aquainted with any other religious beliefs that are applicable? The whole Harry Potter series really reminds me more of some of the religious sagas that pre-date Christianity. Again, I can't provide references, because all of my sources are at home in Pennsylvania and I'm in Maryland. Ancient Mesopotamian and Greek BCE-era writings come to mind, though, rather than any CE-era works. Also, you mentioned Percy in regards to right versus wrong. In Percy's case, while I think he's being a total prat and I would've done something completely different, he's also following the rule of law to the best of his understanding, which should fall under the whole, "render unto Caesar what is Caeser's" or however that passage goes. Percy's attempting to abide by the law, no matter how stupid or impracticle said law may be. So, Percy can't *truly* be wrong, can he? I mean if we take into account the Caesar to Caesar thing. The same thing applies to the case of Marietta; both she and Percy were complying with what they thought was the law. Yeah, Marietta's a sneak, but I still don't agree with punishing her so sadistically when she did what she thought was right. Maybe a swift kick to the shin or a swirlie would've sufficed. Though, I suppose that's not really much better than writing "sneak" across her face, huh? When do you stop obeying the law? According the Caeser verse, never; so Percy, Marietta, and anyone else following laws established by society can never be wrong. But Harry breaks the rules/laws plenty of times, so if the Caesar rule, an important part of Christianity (at least in my church when I was growing up) can't be applied to the books. How many other Christian ideas can be applied? I would assume this eliminates Christianity as the main influence (I imagine it could still be an influence, but not the main one), but I'm not sure because the government classified my childhood church a cult and I don't know what lessons were emphasized in "normal" churches. ***WARNING: Major Snape bias may influence the following opinion*** You've been warned! :-D I've given some thought to Snape's case in light of the situation that you posited regarding whether he was doing the right thing for personal gain or because he'd truly repented of his previous actions. I'm of two minds on this. When it comes down to the really important Order/defeating Voldie stuff, half of me thinks that he's NOT doing it for the acclaim and his intentions are pure. The only time that it seems as if he was seeking attention was when he tried to have Sirius arrested. That seems to be only peripherally related to whatever it is that Snape is doing for the Order currently or did during Voldie's initial reign. As such, it's not all that important when considering Snape's true motives. So, yes, he wanted acclaim for catching a wanted criminal, but if anything, there's been no indication that he wants any attention for his work against Voldie. However, my other half says, "yeah, but what about his seeming jealousy for Harry's fame! He might be trying to one-up Harry and that's not an honest intention!" I don't know what to say about that, except for he seems more miffed that Harry's initially gotten so much attention for doing a whole lot of nothing, rather than being miffed for the sole fact that Harry has attention. I'd be mad too if some kid was famous for still being alive while I was hated despite doing a bunch of dangerous work. So, it's jealousy; but not jealousy over Harry being famous. It's jealousy that Harry was initially famous without having done anything. If Snape's teaching methods are any example, he definitely feels that what you receive must be earned, not given. I imagine that Harry's automatic fame, even it if wasn't Harry's fault, was a great affront to Snape's sensibilities. And let's not talk about James Potter. My point is this, I think Snape's intentions are explainable and pure enough for me because I can't make any sense of the Christian idea of sin and redemption. He's doing the right thing now and as long as he keeps doing the right thing, I can't see why it would matter so much WHY he's doing what he's doing, so long as he's doing it. Yes, actions with intent are preferable and that's how I dictate what I do. However, during a nasty and justifiable war for survival, I think "actions without or without intent" is somewhat relative. What I'm talking about is say that Party A has the same goals as Party B, but maybe for entirely different reasons. Making it easier is that Parties A and B both hate Party C; again, it may be for two entirely different reasons, but that's not important in the grand scheme of things because you both have the same enemy AND the same goals. If the goal is getting rid of someone that is 100 times more evil than either A or B, does the motivation really matter all that much? The greater threat is from C; anything else is nitpicking. Ok, say that stealing hats and socks is the most evil thing in the world. What if Party A hates Big Nasty Evil Dude and wants him gone because BNED stole Party A's socks. Party B hates Big Nasty Evil Dude and wants him gone because BNED stole Party B's hat. Can you say that Party A's reason for wanting Big Nasty Evil Dude gone is more justifiable than Party B's? Big Nasty Evil Dude is Big, Nasty, and Evil and A and B want him gone. Dumbledore may be all about good versus bad, etc. and maybe Snape is "Voldie screwed me over, I'm gonna get him back." But can that matter if the end goal is to get rid of the darkest wizard the wizarding world has seen (aside from maybe Grindewald)? And who's to say whether Dumbledore or Snape has a more valid reason. "I got screwed over" might be really, really valid to me because I'm suffering the immediate effects. It's like, you're starving so you don't have time to worry about depleted fossil fuels. My goal coincides with the good guys, but my life's really crappy at the moment and I haven't worked my way past that immediate concern, so "we have to save the world from plunging into darkness" is a little beyond me at the moment. If I'm Dumbledore, I take what I can get. So, I guess my whole point is: there can't be absolutes, only relativity. How many people have I thoroughly confused? Raise your hands, please! :-) AyanEva (ardent Severus Snape defender) ---------------------------------------------- Tonks: > I think that religion is very quitely in the background. They > observe Christmas and Easter. Pagan wizards would not do that. And > JKR is not afraid of the Church. She has smuggled religion into > the US schools!! But not many people know it because they do not > understand the symbols that they are reading. JKR has the Hogwarts > motto "never tickle a sleeping dragon" for a reason. And I for one > just love it!!! Right under the noses of all the "keep religion > out of the schools" people. And it help that the Religous Right > are opposed to it. I just chuckle. JKR is smuggling God folks!! > She is teaching the children basic Christian truths, and most > don't even know it. AyanEva: I know I just stated my confusion in another thread, but Christmas and Easter ARE pagan holidays. And it's very much in line with what pagans would practice (I used to practice Wicca, but I've mostly lapsed). And this is part of the reason that I'm so confused about the Christian-religion-in-the-books thing; I just don't see it. I think I'm looking at things from a completely different angle. Info on Easter: http://www.goddessgift.com/pandora's_box/easter-history.htm Info on Christmas: http://www.hyperhistory.net/apwh/essays/cot/t0w32christmas.htm I should add, that the Mithraic cult was actually competing AGAINST Christianity for something like 200 years and the early Christian church adopted the birthday (December 25th) and parts of the story of Mithras in order to draw converts. The Mithraic cult eventually failed, most likely because membership was open only to men. The women often worshipped Isis, who was synchrotized with the Virgin Mary, gaining Christianity more converts. By the way, in the other thread that Posted on, I mentioned the guy who killed a bull and stepped on a snake; that was Mithras who did all of that, I just couldn't think of his name at the time. I've skimmed both of those web sources and they seem to in line with what I remember from my texts; with the addition of the Mithras information. The Easter information is quite reliable. AyanEva (truly baffled) -------------------------------------------------- REMINDER from your friendly neighborhood list elf: Please send only your responses to the above that pertains to canon to the main list here. As always, all off-topic responses should be sent to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter (should you wish to discuss religions at large) while keeping in mind that this is a sensitive topic. Keep it civil, please! Thanks. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 11:49:38 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 04:49:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percy Weasley - A Death Eater In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050430114938.11853.qmail@web53101.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128303 > Jaanis: > > How much Percy may ignore the rules of life (as you called it), I > think it was very rude of him to send his mother's Christmas > present back. I don't belive Percy is evil or on the side of > Voldemort too, I'm merely > watching him in the books without making any judgement (which could > prove wrong later on). Still I was very surprised (unpleasantly, of > course) by his reaction, it would be quite an obstacle to redeeming > himself. I so agree with Steve's analysis that it hurts the fillings in my teeth. As Jaanis remarks, Percy's actions are not of the sweeping acolyte-of-evil sort; they're the pettish childish "won't!" gestures of a very hurt boy who's not as grown up as he thinks he is. Or his parents think he is, for that matter. With Bill and Charlie out of the house (and the country), I think Percy had taken it upon himself to be the designated Older Brother and even his parents got used to thinking of Percy as almost older than his years. Big mistake. Even prats have feelings, after all. Magda (who is also sure that Penelope is still in the picture but we don't see her because she's not on Harry's radar screen either) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From starmom513 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 10:46:24 2005 From: starmom513 at yahoo.com (starmom513) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 03:46:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM Message-ID: <20050430104625.19527.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128304 --- gelite67 wrote: > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to > kill Voldemort at > the MOM in OOP? My theory on this (again - having originally posted this in 10/03, #83783) is that Dumbledore knows that Voldemort doesn't know the entire prophesy -- Voldemort doesn't know that Harry is the one with the power to vanquish him. If Voldemort knew that, would Dumbledore still be "the only one he ever feared"? As long as Voldemort doesn't know that Dumbledore (theoretically) can't kill him, Dumbledore still has that advantage over him. Dumbledore can't risk losing that by trying and failing to kill him. starmom __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 13:14:49 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:14:49 -0000 Subject: LV's patience In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128305 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bbkkyy55" wrote: > Chys said: > > > I always thought there was something off by that, and LV isn't > > stupid. (Well, not completely.) He would know when to sit still and > > let things pass, right? He's very patient. 12 years as a half- ghost > > proves that. He can wait- > > Bonnie: > > Excuse me for jumping in here, but how does that prove LV was > patient. What choice did he have? He tried many times to get a body > (SS/PS, COS). I don't think we can call him patient when he had no > choice. Sorry :( You missed my point, but whatever. Most people usually do. Having had to wait so long, what's another day? He should have figured that out by then, is what I was saying. That's why I said that he wasn't Completely stupid. Chys From yami69hikari at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 13:24:45 2005 From: yami69hikari at yahoo.com (Chys Sage Lattes) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:24:45 -0000 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) In-Reply-To: <05ee01c54d16$b9d1c980$dd00000a@kelsy> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128306 Kelsy > Hagrid could have very well retrieved both boys from the ruins. Taken > Neville to his Grandmother and then delivered Harry to the Dursleys in > the same time frame and not really alter the facts that we have of > that day. > > Just my 2 cents > > Perhaps Neville was already AT his grandmothers when his parents were attacked? Maybe Lestrange was sent to get him, and did in his parents so- while LV went for the half-blood child himself. Chys From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 14:04:38 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 14:04:38 -0000 Subject: LV not fulfulling the terms of the prophecy? (long) In-Reply-To: <05ee01c54d16$b9d1c980$dd00000a@kelsy> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128307 Kelsy: > Did you ever think that the reason that Neville's parents are in the > hospital is they were the first ones to be attacked. Maybe when James > and Lily went into hiding they had both Neville and Harry with them. > Maybe James was holding LV (sorry can't spell it correctly) off so > that Lily could get the boys hidden. Lily might have gotten Neville > into the hiding place and was about to get Harry there, but LV got > into the room first. Effectively stopping Lily from hiding Harry with > Neville or she would expose both of them to LV. There is the missing > day that is not accounted for after the attack. (snip) Ginger: This comes up a lot, but it can't be. The attack on the Longbottoms took place well after LV attacked the Potters. How long is not known. The only reference we have is DD's comment in GoF ch. 30 (p. 603 US paperback) that "the attacks on them came after Voldemort's fall from power, just when everyone thought they were safe." We've speculated, but come to no conclusions. It may have been several months or a few years. Steve (bboymn) has had some good posts on this. Maybe he'll jump in? Ginger, "Support Levitated Objects!" From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 15:01:57 2005 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:01:57 -0000 Subject: Accio 2005 press release: new Guest Speaker andTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128308 > Alla: > > As to punishing him under WW laws... Well, maybe, if we knew ENOUGH > of WW laws. Maybe sometimes after all said and done JKR decides to > publish some useful additions as to how WW operates in many areas. > > I see no problem in trying Snape under "muggle" laws. I am well > aware that many do not share this POV, but nevertheless I will say > it again - I see nothing horrible in comparing WW with RL. JKR is > not "wizard" in disguise after all, right? ;-) Ginger: She's not!?! (just kidding) You are right that there are comparisons to be made. If there weren't, JKR would have to take a lot of time explaining things to us. As it is, she uses our familiarity with our own world to make hers work. Comparisons I can see. Judgements are another story. More on that later.... Alla continued: > She is a "muggle" writer,who models many things in WW after "real > world", IMO and IMO only. I do NOT think that WW morals and laws are > THAT different from ours,or if they are, in my opinion and in my > opinion only they will radically change at the end. > > JKR is also not writing about aliens. She is writing about people, > who just happen to be wizards, many of whom come to WW from "real" > world,as described by her. > > So, I think it is perfectly fine for dear Severus to stand trial > under muggle laws. Ginger: I quite agree that she is writing about humans, but humans differ in customs and traditions. I definately see where you are coming from: the WW she is writing about is as British as the RW she writes about. But they are also very different. We see it in characters like Hermione and her SPEW efforts. The SPEW efforts show a great gap in WW and RW thinking. I am one of those who is withholding judgement on the HouseElf situation until we know more about them. In RL, I would think the slavery abhorrent. With the elves, I am waiting to see what *they* want. I think this gap shows best that there is a huge difference between RW and WW thinking. Alla again: > As to political correctness, I am not sure if you include me into > that vocal group. :-) If you do, well, the only thing I can say in > my defense that I did not grew up in America ( although I am an > american citizen now), I did all my schooling, except law school > outside America . So, not only americans can think that RL person > like Snape should not be allowed to approach children. > > So, I freely admit in "forcing" my real life thought on WW ( I > explained my rationale above to the best of my ability), but I will > vehemently deny forcing "american thought " upon WW. :-) Ginger: I hope you didn't take my comment to mean you in particular. It wasn't aimed at anyone. Just more of an observation. Like saying there's quite a bit of garlic in the sauce. Noting it's there, but not searching out every bit of it. As for you personally, I think you are one of the most concientious people on the list when it comes to specifying that your opinions are your own and not forcing them on others. I do not always agree with you, but I enjoy your posts, and that is one of the reasons. That and the fact that you write well. Forcing "RL thought on the WW" is interesting. It goes back to what I said earlier about judgements. (I warned you there was more to come;o) I see judging the WW by RW standards like judging another culture by one's own. Pardon my memory, but I remember you saying you are in the US now, but originally from ???? I can't remember. Sorry about that. I guess I would see judging the WW by RW standards like judging the US by the standards of your original country, or vice versa. I work with a lot of people from a variety of countries. I learned quickly not to make assumptions. I believe we are more alike than different, but the differences are there. And that's not bad, as long as the differences are acceptable. If I'm supposed to be training someone, and he won't listen because I am female, it doesn't fly. There are safety concerns to consider. I'd rather report him than have him lose his hand in a machine. He is now in my culture, not his old one. He is the one who has to adjust. On the other hand, if someone needs to stop work to pray at a certain time, I'll wait for him before we continue. I see judging Snape by RW standards like going to the country of origin of the man who won't listen to me and forcing men to listen to women. It isn't their way, and we are the outsiders there. Snape is an outsider to our world and our way of thinking. If he were to teach in the RW, we would be expected to judge him by our standards. I think he would expect it too. Where do we as readers draw the line? I guess that varies from person to person. I certainly have no problem with a person not liking Snape because of the way he behaves. I understand it totally. He's not a nice guy at all. (I hope that wasn't a spoiler for anyone;o) We do place judgements on characters. It's part of the reading process. It's how we get involved in the story line. I'm not conerned with people saying "I hate Snape because..." I just wonder why some people (and I'm not saying you, Alla) think he *must* change or that JKR "shouldn't" write him as a mean person. To me it's part of the story. It's the taking him out of his environment and putting him in ours that I don't understand. Apples to oranges, and all that. I'm another one who had a Snape-like teacher in school. He tested 25% on the book, 25% on class lecture, and 50% on stuff not presented to us at all. Very rarely did anyone score over 50% on a test. If they did, he put them in the front row, and thunked them over the head with rolled up test papers each time they failed to do it again. In the end, he only actually graded on the 50% we had covered, but his point was that there was lots more to the subject than what we would learn in school, and that if we wanted to be truely knowlegdeable, we had to hit the library on our own. He is remembered fondly by almost everyone who he taught. This is getting very long, so I'll end here. Thanks to anyone who made it this far. Ginger, who was a very Snape-like Sunday School teacher at one time, and it went well. From nrenka at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 15:08:11 2005 From: nrenka at yahoo.com (nrenka) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:08:11 -0000 Subject: Sin/Redemption & Snape / Christianity in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AyanEva" wrote: > AyanEva: > > Ok. I'm really hoping this doesn't come off as an attack on > Christianity because it's NOT AN ATTACK at all! I just want to make > that clear. I'm just having some trouble understanding the > applicability of Christianity to the Harry Potter books, that's all. > I've read every post on this, but I'm still befuddled. So, please > bear with me and keep in mind that it's not my intention to make > anyone mad or offend people. These are honest questions that really > are related to the Harry Potter series as a whole. This might be of interest, if you haven't seen it: >From the Vancouver Sun interview by Max Wyman of Oct 26,2000. ------- Harry, of course, is able to battle supernatural evil with supernatural forces of his own, and Rowling is quite clear that she doesn't personally believe in that kind of magic -- "not at all." Is she a Christian? "Yes, I am," she says. "Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books." When you get that "will be able to guess what's coming in the books" there, it points to her religious beliefs informing the action in fairly strong and direct ways. This has led to a lot of listie speculation in the past about symbolism/etc., but as Lupinlore was exploring, it also has potential ethical ramifications. > In regards to sin/redemption, if a person thinks that they're > right, then they don't know that they're wrong. How can you be > punished for being wrong if you never knew you were wrong in the > first place because you didn't know what was actually right? (Note: these are not necessarily my own positions, but a feeble attempt at explication.) One might say, as in the legal system, that "ignorance of the law is no excuse." JKR is writing a universe with many shades of grey, but equally strong suggestions that there are things that are wrong, and there is a deep opposition between things that are right and easy. One common theme seems to be examination of these concepts, struggling to determine what is right and what is not and thus exorcise the spirit of pride, which is *the* fundamental sin in Christianity (at least some formulations of it) because it sets oneself above God. The DEs who believe that they are right refuse examination of their ideas, and follow a false idol. > That doesn't fit with the fact that no religion is mentioned. > Christmas doesn't count because the date pre-dates Christianity and > it's the Winter Solstice anyway; and the birthday of some guy who > killed a bull and stepped on a snake whose name I can't remember. > I'm pretty sure there were some stars and a moon or something > involved too, but that's beside the point. But people do say "God" in the books (a lot more than they say Merlin, for instance), even people like Malfoy who some have postulated as being pureblood and thus pagan. Doesn't seem to work that way at all. Don't forget the Fat Friar, either--monasteries and cathedrals were centers of learning and culture throughout the entire Middle Ages, and a strong nod is being made to that with the Hufflepuff House ghost. > When do you stop obeying the law? According the Caeser verse, never; > so Percy, Marietta, and anyone else following laws established by > society can never be wrong. But Harry breaks the rules/laws plenty > of times, so if the Caesar rule, an important part of Christianity >(at least in my church when I was growing up) can't be applied to the > books. How many other Christian ideas can be applied? I would assume > this eliminates Christianity as the main influence (I imagine it > could still be an influence, but not the main one), but I'm not > sure because the government classified my childhood church a cult > and I don't know what lessons were emphasized in "normal" churches. >From my perspective, that's a very idiosyncratic reading of that principle--which can be read a number of ways. Remember that the followup verse is "And unto God what is God's", and God commands one's moral allegiance: this has been/can be read as a call to disobey an unjust law to do the righteous thing, which is what at least some of Harry's rulebreaking falls under. JKR seems to care a great, great deal about intent. > My point is this, I think Snape's intentions are explainable and > pure enough for me because I can't make any sense of the Christian > idea of sin and redemption. No one knows what Snape's real intentions ARE, of course... > He's doing the right thing now and as long as he keeps doing the > right thing, I can't see why it would matter so much WHY he's doing > what he's doing, so long as he's doing it. There are many ethical systems which consider intent to be of fundamental importance in ethics, and JKR seems to be flirting with some of them. Think about the Cruciatus Curse--righteous anger doesn't work for it, but one must *want* to hurt the other person. Intentions directly become results. I appreciate your perspective, but I think this is a case where (possibly) your horizon and the horizon of the author are going to end up radically incommensurate. The Potterverse has shades of grey, but JKR is not exactly a moral relativist: there are things that are good, and there are things that are evil. I suspect this will make itself even more and more manifest, and her own moral systems WILL show in her treatment of the characters. Which means all those fun comments about Snape should lead somewhere. > AyanEva: > > I know I just stated my confusion in another thread, but Christmas > and Easter ARE pagan holidays. And it's very much in line with what > pagans would practice (I used to practice Wicca, but I've mostly > lapsed). And this is part of the reason that I'm so confused about > the Christian-religion-in-the-books thing; I just don't see it. I > think I'm looking at things from a completely different angle. They originally coincided with pagan holidays--probably not accidental. However, as practiced today and in meaning, for a believer they are, of course, decidedly not pagan holidays. (As a side note: Wicca is maybe a hundred years old. Most 'reconstructions' of historical pagan rituals are tenuous at best.) What we have seen in the books are representations of holidays celebrated very much in the modern real-world style, chocolate eggs and all. What we don't know about is the personal religious devotions of characters. Some of the symbolism is there, but it can be hard to hunt out because she does with things what she will, and doesn't feel an obligation to keep the meanings the same. Take the snake symbol: positive in some cultures, negative in most Christian readings. Which one is she riffing off of for the basilisk and Slytherin House? I don't know. Some would like to put JKR as an Inkling, together with C. S. Lewis and J. R. R. Tolkien, both authors where the Christian influence is really obvious. Since I'm a believer in her comments panning out, that one up at the top is very, very suggestive. -Nora waits for the metaphysics of the series to become less obscure...finally... From littleleah at handbag.com Sat Apr 30 15:14:56 2005 From: littleleah at handbag.com (littleleahstill) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:14:56 -0000 Subject: Lord Voldemort not fulfilling the terms of the prophecy (long) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128310 Angie wrote: Angie again (who greatly appreciates Leah's post and wonders if anyone has officially been driven crazy by this series!): (snip) That makes sense, that Voldy was trying to defeat the prophecy. Even though Voldemort hadn't heard the entire prophecy, he knew enough to know that he wanted to get rid of anyone with the power to vanquish him. But I wonder why crafty old JKR didn't have DD just say that, instead, if that was the case? It makes sense that Voldy, (who obviously had never read about Perseus, Oedipus, Jason, or Paris) thought he was fulfulling the "must die" part of the prophecy, but of course it doesn't make sense because he hadn't heard that part of the prophecy yet at the time he tried to kill Harry -- aaaargh! Is there a cure????? Leah again: Thanks, Angie. After practically standing on my head looking at the wording, I almost got resigned to the fact that 'fulfilling' should actually have read 'thwarting' in DD's explanation, and it was all a slip of the pen or word processor. But being reluctant to attribute anything to do with the prophecy, GH, etc to a slip, I had another go and came up with this: Supposing what Voldemort heard when he was told the prophecy snippet was: 'The one with the power, to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches', which put another way is, 'The Dark Lord, in order to vanquish the one with the power, approaches'. Bear in mind that Voldemort doesn't know anything about marking, he doesn't know about power he knows not, he doesn't know about one dying at the hand of the other etc'. On the intepretation above, Voldemort 'knows' that there is one 'with the power' and that the Dark Lord will approach him. The one with the power can be identified by parents and date of birth. That's what Voldemort has done, and he approaches him at GH thinking he is fulfilling the terms of the prophecy. Of course, as DD says, Voldemort is mistaken because what the prophecy actually tells us is that the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord, approaches' But what's the power Voldemort thinks the one has? Leah (who knows someone will write in and say this makes no sense in any language but English (or possibly just makes no sense) From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Apr 30 15:18:40 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 15:18:40 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128311 > > Irene: > > Why do you think she always protects him when Ron and > Harry indulge in a slugfest? > > Alla: > I think she knows some kind of secret about Snape AND just as she kept Remus secret she keeps Snape's. Honestly, if I believed that Snape is a vampire, I would say that maybe Hermione somehow discovered that he is. :-) > Pippin: It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Hermione has something on half the people in the school by now. She's a right little blackmailer. But if she has something on Snape, why hasn't she used it? She was quick enough to out Lupin when she thought he'd become a threat. We've also seen her practice her, er, unique approach to behavior modification on Rita Skeeter and the twins. If she thought Snape's behavior was as harmful as all that, wouldn't she do something about it? Certainly she wishes Snape would be a bit nicer. But bearing in mind that this is the girl who would rather undergo an illegal curse than miss an important lesson, I think Hermione must think she's getting something special out of Snape's lessons. What is she learning? I think it's the little asides that she finds valuable, the things Harry and Ron pay no attention to, either because they're not part of the regular course work and won't be on the exam, or because they think it's just Snape being horrible. Like, where to find the recipe for polyjuice potion. Or the fact that the ingredients for Shrinking Solution can be used to make a poison. Or that the Draught of Peace, with certain alterations, will put the drinker into an irreversible trance. The kind of thing, in other words, that might be useful to know if you were planning to fight Voldemort, but wouldn't need to know to pass your OWLs or NEWTs. Pippin noticing that none of those little asides appear in Snape's inspected lesson, and speculating that Snape is also the source of Hermione's knowledge of murtlap juice From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Apr 30 16:58:40 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 16:58:40 -0000 Subject: Rights of goblins and other magical creatures In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128312 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "frnsic1" wrote: > In a re-read of OotP, I noticed Mr. Weasley and Lupin discussing > Goblin rights (p. 85 US): > > "'...if they're offered freedoms we've been denying them for > centuries they're going to be tempted [to assist Voldemort].'" > > What freedoms could wizards and the MoM deny creatures such as > goblins? What could goblins gain from obeying the "rules" of > wizards? > > I understand that house-elves "enjoy" serving wizarding families > (and that they can and do use their own brand of magic, which, in > many ways is superior to the magic that wizards are capable of), and > the centaurs consider themselves superior and prefer to be left > alone, but goblin freedom does not seem to have been explained much > in canon. > > Any ideas??? Pippin: I suspect the main issue is wand use. "No non-human creature is permitted to carry or use a wand."-- GoF ch 9. "In your opinion, did wand legislation contribute to, or lead to better control of, goblin riots in the eighteenth century?" -OOP ch 31. Pippin From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sat Apr 30 17:26:38 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 18:26:38 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: <62e593ee81909625a9213fe4f7a1444c@fandm.edu> References: <42729837.5070808@btopenworld.com> <62e593ee81909625a9213fe4f7a1444c@fandm.edu> Message-ID: <4273BFCE.6070207@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128313 Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote: > > I'm sorry, technical question: what do we know about his accidents > statistics compared to the other potions teachers? I must apologise - somebody was using this argument so convinsingly in a previous round of this argument, that it has blended with canonical facts in my mind. :-) So, no, we don't know anything canonical about his compared statistics. Irene From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 17:36:50 2005 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 17:36:50 -0000 Subject: Sin/Redemption & Snape / Christianity in HP (was: Funerals are for the livin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128314 > Lupinlore in post 128255 says: > > What if a person > is not penitent because they genuinely feel they are not wrong? > This applies perhaps more to Percy than to Snape. Shouldn't Percy > (or Seamus or Cho or even Umbridge) get a break if they honestly > believe themselves to be in the right? > > The answer, in this perspective, is a flat NO. There are two > realizations that lead to the beginning of wisdom. 1. There is a > God. 2. You ain't Him. Your own understanding is not important. > What is important is whether you are acting in accordance with God's > edicts. The Court of God has no appeal, no rules of equity, and no > patience for arguments about technicalities or interpretations. > > > AyanEva: > > Ok. I'm really hoping this doesn't come off as an attack on > Christianity because it's NOT AN ATTACK at all! I just want to make > that clear. I'm just having some trouble understanding the > applicability of Christianity to the Harry Potter books, that's all. > I've read every post on this, but I'm still befuddled. So, please > bear with me and keep in mind that it's not my intention to make > anyone mad or offend people. These are honest questions that really > are related to the Harry Potter series as a whole. Annemehr: First of all, Lupinlore began in this thread by invoking C.S. Lewis. Let me just say that much of what he went on to write is not at all what I understand Lewis to be saying. Anyone who has read Lewis' treatment of a character named "Emeth" in the end of _The Last Battle_ might agree with me. As this is not a C.S. Lewis group, I'll stop there. Anyway, what the relevance of Christianity to Rowling's writing will be is hinted at in this part of an interview she did ("J.K. Rowling Interview," CBCNewsWorld: Hot Type, July 13, 2000) ************************************ E: You do believe in God. JK: Yeah. Yeah. E: In magic and JK: Magic in the sense in which it happens in my books, no, I don't believe. I don't believe in that. No. No. This is so frustrating. Again, there is so much I would like to say, and come back when I've written book seven. But then maybe you won't need to even say it 'cause you'll have found it out anyway. You'll have read it. E: But in your own life, I mean, are you a churchgoer? JK: (Nods) Mmm hmm. Well I go more than to weddings and christenings. Yes, I do. E: And in your own life, would the church and that kind of spirituality help you deal with the loss of your mum? JK: No, actually it didn't at the time. No. (Shakes her head) E: So you've come back to it. JK: Yeah, I would say so. I have some problems with conventional organized religion. Some problems. (Long pause) But but, yes, it's a place I would go to in a time of trouble. It probably is a place I would go to in a time of trouble. I wouldn't expect it to provide all the answers, 'cause I would expect to find some of those within me. E: Right, but the institutional side of it, you know, the rules JK: I have certain problems with some aspects of that. Yes I do. **************************************** So, she is a Christian, and certain of her beliefs relate to how the story goes, so she can't talk about it too much yet for fear of spoilers. There are one or two even better quotes for this somewhere, but that one took long enough to find! What I personally figure happened, was that after Jo had the idea of Harry, and began thinking of what his story was, at some point she decided his parents were murdered. Enter "Evil." Since the evil is very evil, the good needed to fight it will be very good. Naturally, the Good in her books will at least be compatible with her own core beliefs, therefore the denoument will be compatible with her Christian beliefs. Further, it seems if she talked about her most deeeply held beliefs too much, it would be too much of a hint about how the story ends. People naturally seem to jump to the conclusion that Harry sacrifices himself to save the WW, but I don't think that's a safe bet. AyanEva: > I'll admit that I'm not a Christian because Christianity confuses the > crap out of me, but the sin/repentence thing hardly seems fair or > very logical. Annemehr: Well, if you're interested, I'd recommend _Mere Christianity_ by C.S. Lewis for an explanation of basic Christian beliefs in a shortish book and in plain English. Some Christians would argue with some of the details (naturally), but it's still a good overview. Lewis himself was Church of England. AyanEva: > When do you stop obeying the law? According the Caeser verse, never; > so Percy, Marietta, and anyone else following laws established by > society can never be wrong. But Harry breaks the rules/laws plenty of > times, so if the Caesar rule, an important part of Christianity (at > least in my church when I was growing up) can't be applied to the > books. How many other Christian ideas can be applied? I would assume > this eliminates Christianity as the main influence (I imagine it could > still be an influence, but not the main one), but I'm not sure because > the government classified my childhood church a cult and I don't know > what lessons were emphasized in "normal" churches. Annemehr: Christian belief is that the law of God supercedes the laws of men, whenever they are in conflict. Christians would agree that "I was just following orders" is no excuse for doing wrong (see Nuremberg). So Harry can break rules and still be in a Christian-influenced book (sometimes he breaks them rightly, and sometimes he's just being a normal, imperfect boy). Incidentally, authorities, be it parents or church leaders or governments, hate to have to own up to the fact that it is sometimes necessary to break the rules. Partly, of course, it's because they don't want you questioning them. Another part of it, though, is that if such an admission leads to everyone questioning the rules, and deciding on their own when to break them, eventually a slippery slope may lead to anarchy. And anarchy just ends up in "might makes right." AyanEva: > However, my > other half says, "yeah, but what about [Snape's] seeming jealousy for Harry's > fame! He might be trying to one-up Harry and that's not an honest > intention!" > > I don't know what to say about that, except for he seems more miffed > that Harry's initially gotten so much attention for doing a whole lot > of nothing, rather than being miffed for the sole fact that Harry has > attention. I'd be mad too if some kid was famous for still being alive > while I was hated despite doing a bunch of dangerous work. So, it's > jealousy; but not jealousy over Harry being famous. It's jealousy that > Harry was initially famous without having done anything. If Snape's > teaching methods are any example, he definitely feels that what you > receive must be earned, not given. I imagine that Harry's automatic > fame, even it if wasn't Harry's fault, was a great affront to Snape's > sensibilities. And let's not talk about James Potter. Annemehr: Actually, I think it's all about James Potter. I don't think Snape is jealous of Harry's fame per se, but that he assumes it will make him arrogant like James, and he's determined to squash that out of him. Turns out, Harry is not arrogant like James, and all Snape managed to do was squash out of Harry and chance of him trusting Snape -- which had very bad consequences in OoP. AyanEva: > My point is this, I think Snape's intentions are explainable and pure > enough for me because I can't make any sense of the Christian idea of > sin and redemption. He's doing the right thing now and as long as he > keeps doing the right thing, I can't see why it would matter so much > WHY he's doing what he's doing, so long as he's doing it. Yes, actions > with intent are preferable and that's how I dictate what I do. However, > during a nasty and justifiable war for survival, I think > "actions without or without intent" is somewhat relative. Annemehr: Yes, in a sense, the reason why Snape is working against LV is somewhat relative. In another sense, though, it might matter why. Suppose Snape is working against LV because he thinks he can supplant him? Then DD trusting him with so much of his strategy could come back to bite the "good guys." I'm actually betting DD knows why Snape is against LV, whether his reasons are "pure" or not. As we have seen by the Occlumency failure, DD can still make mistakes regarding how Snape might act in any particular situation. I agree with you that DD might rightly work with Snape while knowing Snape's reasons are not perfectly pure. Heck, whose motivations ever are? With regard to Christian ideas of sin and redemption (which might inform JKR's ideas on the same), I think to most (or at least, many) Christians what matters is that you do what's morally right as best as you understand it. Of course, it is also important that one make a good-faith effort to find out what is morally right. There is the further consideration that doing wrong is harmful in itself. If you do something wrong without knowing it, you are (in my and many Christians' view) *not guilty,* however, you have still done harm to yourself and/or others, which is what makes it all the more important to *try* not to do wrong. Therefore, we Christians can have sympathy for Percy because he grew up believing in following rules and obeying authority. He was, as far as I can tell, sincere and thoughtful about it. He was fine when his authorities were his parents and DD, and no conflict arose until he was offered the position as Fudge's assistant, and his father's (reported) reaction seemed more insulting than a concerned warning that he was making a mistake. Then in OoP, Percy is in a very painful position as his new authority is in direct conflict with his old ones. I think the point at which we can begin to say that he is "sinning" is that he ought to know that his knew beliefs about DD and Harry are in direct conflict with what he knows of them personally. He does have a little "wiggle room," though in that it is just possible to believe DD is mistaken. What really keeps him with the Ministry, I think, is that breaking with Fudge would involve a huge and very painful destruction of his core beliefs -- in other words, it may not be right, but it is easy(er). At this point (post-OoP), of course, he knows Fudge was wrong, and perhaps can see more clearly that he ought not to have followed him so blindly when he ought to have been able to see better from his own knowledge of DD and Harry. This will be his turning point, and an unmistakable moment of decision. > ---------------------------------------------- > > Tonks: > > I think that religion is very quitely in the background. They > > observe Christmas and Easter. Pagan wizards would not do that. JKR is smuggling God folks!! > > She is teaching the children basic Christian truths, and most > > don't even know it. > > > AyanEva: > > I know I just stated my confusion in another thread, but Christmas > and Easter ARE pagan holidays. And it's very much in line with what > pagans would practice (I used to practice Wicca, but I've mostly > lapsed). And this is part of the reason that I'm so confused about > the Christian-religion-in-the-books thing; I just don't see it. Annemehr: Well, some Christian truths (as well as holidays) are shared among other religions. I think what JKR is writing is at least fairly universally *understandable.* We already see that the fandom disagrees about which incidents in the books are right and wrong (e.g. whether Hermione was right to lure Umbridge into the Forest). Again, I think JKR is very wisely and kindly keeping particular religious *practices* out of the books. She had Harry christened, which to me only says that either his parents were Christian, or they came from a Christian background and christened Harry as a matter of culture. That doesn't narrow down James and Lily's beliefs very much at all, does it? In other words, it's apparently a fact that some of Jo's basic beliefs, which happen to be Christian in nature, inform what she means to be "Good" in the books. I don't think that's going to end up being an obstacle to non-Christian readers. We are all, of course, free to read them as we please, for whatever we can get out of them. Er, does that help at all? Annemehr who took so long writing this post that all this has probably been said in five other replies... From irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com Sat Apr 30 17:37:36 2005 From: irene_mikhlin at btopenworld.com (Irene) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 18:37:36 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4273C260.6080904@btopenworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128315 dumbledore11214 wrote: > > You mentioned Shaun in this post. We had similar discussions with > him. I remember him saying that for some children ( and for him also) > Snape like methods worked. > > That is fine, but I strongly believe that if such teacher manages at > the same time severely traumatise some students or even ONE the price > of such education is too high. > > You see, even IF Snape manages to beat into some students > or into many students his subject, but at the same time some of his > students even ONE will end up.... oh, I don't know, for RL > comparison let's say in mental facility as a pure result of his > actions , I would NOT consider him to be a good teacher. You are hinting at Neville, aren't you? :-) Lots of people hope that some external force will change Snape/Neville dynamics, for example, Dumbledore will tell Snape to soften his methods or something like that. In my opinion, it will be really insulting for Neville. The only Gryffindor way out of it would be his personal growth, and the promise was there in OoTP. What I hope for in book 6, is the new brave and competent Neville, who does not lose it when Snape as much as looks in his direction. The only way Neville can prove anything to himself (and to Snape, if he cares) is by producing decent potions under pressure. > THEN of course students won't have much to complain about, because > they chose to stay in his class. > My guess will be that not too many will stay though. :-) I'd bet you 100 galleons that Hermione would stay. She wants to prove her worth to Snape like mad. She just does it the wrong way, same problem as with house elfs - good intentions, bad tactics. > > Yes, I know that we won't have much of a story then. Exactly. This is a boarding school story, and such a story must have your old evil Latin master. Irene From bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 17:39:50 2005 From: bbkkyy55 at yahoo.com (bbkkyy55) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 17:39:50 -0000 Subject: Prophecies in General Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128316 I've been rereading SS/PS. I'm sure this has been noticed, but for the benefit of those of us who are fairly newish I will mention it. In Chapter 15 it says: "Good luck, Harry Potter," said Firenze. "The planets have been read wrongly before now, even by centaurs. I hope this is one of those times." I know they saw that "Mars is bright tonight"..."Unusally bright." so (correct me if I'm wrong) this indicates that war is coming right? But it seems from Firenze's statement that the centaurs knew something more in regards to Harry's future that they didn't mention. We know they "jus' don' let on much." Firenze's statement and the anger of Bane and Ronan when Firenze rescues Harry, along with their determination "not to set ourselves against the heavens", seems to forbode evil toward Harry. As Hermione quotes McGonagell fortune-telling is "a very imprecise branch of magic." I'm wondering how well these things can be determined. Remember Trelawney's seeing the Grim all the time in POA. Might that not have just been Sirius in his animagus form. I suppose all these things are foreshadowing the troubles that follow, but still, predicting the future seems very foggy. I can see a real danger if one takes them to seriously. I hope Harry will be able to remain stable after thinking over the prophecy. How much can these things be redirected in another direction? Guess we'll all have to wait and see. Bonnie From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 18:09:49 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 18:09:49 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128317 Alla: > I think she knows some kind of secret about Snape AND just as she kept Remus secret she keeps Snape's. Honestly, if I believed that Snape is a vampire, I would say that maybe Hermione somehow discovered that he is. :-) Pippin: It wouldn't surprise me to learn that Hermione has something on half the people in the school by now. She's a right little blackmailer. But if she has something on Snape, why hasn't she used it? She was quick enough to out Lupin when she thought he'd become a threat. We've also seen her practice her, er, unique approach to behavior modification on Rita Skeeter and the twins. If she thought Snape's behavior was as harmful as all that, wouldn't she do something about it? Alla: Too funny, Pippin about Hermione being a right little blackmailer.:-) Nevertheless, since I don't consider her exposing Lupin's secret very fast ( she kept it for at least several months), I can easily speculate why she keeps Snape secret, if such exists,which I believe it does. She only exposed Lupin's secret when she mistakenly believed that Lupin threatened Harry and Ron's life. Whatever sins Snape is guilty towards Harry ( and he is guilty of them, IMO and IMO only), he did not try to kill him yet ( that is unless he is secretly ESE! :-)), I can easily see Hermione feeling sorry for Snape just as she felt sorry for Lupin and kept her mouth shut. There is also that incredibly annoying speech of Dumbledore's ( who is still a highest moral authority for Hermione, IMO). You know... I trust Severus Snape and all that. I can see Hermione keeping silence only because she thinks that Dumbledore knows best, even if she is indeed suspicious. Wouldn't it be funny if Hermione discovers one day that Dumbledore was wrong and she should have spoke up earlier Pippin: Certainly she wishes Snape would be a bit nicer. But bearing in mind that this is the girl who would rather undergo an illegal curse than miss an important lesson, I think Hermione must think she's getting something special out of Snape's lessons. What is she learning? I think it's the little asides that she finds valuable, the things Harry and Ron pay no attention to, either because they're not part of the regular course work and won't be on the exam, or because they think it's just Snape being horrible. Like, where to find the recipe for polyjuice potion. Or the fact that the ingredients for Shrinking Solution can be used to make a poison. Or that the Draught of Peace, with certain alterations, will put the drinker into an irreversible trance. The kind of thing, in other words, that might be useful to know if you were planning to fight Voldemort, but wouldn't need to know to pass your OWLs or NEWTs. Alla: Sure, Hermione is learning from Snape. Hermione as Shaun said yesterday learning from ANY teacher, even Binks. ( except Trelawney, yes) At a risk of sounding as very broken record, I want to say that this was not my point. Irene argued that Snape's teaching style, class environment, etc is the BEST one for Hermione it can be. THAT I don't see proof in canon. I know, Pippin that asking you for canon can be a dangerous thing, since I can get more than I bargained for :-), but I am going to take a chance and ask again. Could you or anybody else for that matter, please show me that Snape treats Hermione as capable student she is. That he encourages her to study that he sees her efforts, etc. By that I don't mean that he is NICE to her. It would be enough for me that he ... let's her talk in his class. By the way, I don't think that Hermione's good grade counts as such proof . As I said I think that Hermione's learning despite Snape not because of him. Just my opinion of course, Thanks, Alla From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 18:40:42 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 18:40:42 -0000 Subject: Trial of Snape/ cultural differences between WW and ours In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128318 Ginger: I quite agree that she is writing about humans, but humans differ in customs and traditions. I definately see where you are coming from: the WW she is writing about is as British as the RW she writes about. But they are also very different. We see it in characters like Hermione and her SPEW efforts. Alla: Well, here is where we disagree, I suppose. I am one of those and who could be very wrong of course, who believe that WW and our world are not as different as it seems. Looking at SPEW example, I can bet you that elves will be free at the end ( not that I am particularly interested in that, mind you, but I believe that JKR does parallel RL more than she wants to show that elves should be left alone because they are such creatures who enjoy being enlsaved) Again, just me. Ginger: As for you personally, I think you are one of the most concientious people on the list when it comes to specifying that your opinions are your own and not forcing them on others. I do not always agree with you, but I enjoy your posts, and that is one of the reasons. That and the fact that you write well. Alla: Thank you! :-) Ginger: Forcing "RL thought on the WW" is interesting. It goes back to what I said earlier about judgements. (I warned you there was more to come;o) I see judging the WW by RW standards like judging another culture by one's own. Alla: Yes, as I said we disagree. I don't see much difference ( I see some of course) between WW and ours, except that they have magic and we don't. :-) Ginger: Pardon my memory, but I remember you saying you are in the US now, but originally from ???? I can't remember. Sorry about that. Alla: Ukraine. Ginger: Where do we as readers draw the line? I guess that varies from person to person. I certainly have no problem with a person not liking Snape because of the way he behaves. I understand it totally. He's not a nice guy at all. (I hope that wasn't a spoiler for anyone;o) Alla: I don't think the line SHOULD be drawn at all. I think it is very reasonable for the reader to analyse the character under the system of values reader is the most familiar with. I mean, sure we will many different interpretations, but that is the fun, right? Ginger: We do place judgements on characters. It's part of the reading process. It's how we get involved in the story line. Alla: Now, THAT I agree with. Ginger: I'm not conerned with people saying "I hate Snape because..." I just wonder why some people (and I'm not saying you, Alla) think he *must* change or that JKR "shouldn't" write him as a mean person. To me it's part of the story. It's the taking him out of his environment and putting him in ours that I don't understand. Apples to oranges, and all that. Alla: Several things going on here. I said many times that I don't think that they are mutually exclusive. First - I absolutely ENJOY Snape as part of the story. I do NOT want him out of the story, absolutely not. I would also never say that JKR should not write him as mean character. But, I absolutely, most definitely WANT Snape to change at the END of the series, not now. I will be dissapointed, if he will not change. I think it is my right as a reader to think about what direction I want the character to go. In fact, the hope that Snape will change is what keeps me from thinking of him as "love to hate" character and instead I am still on "love/hate" level. Am I making sense? As JKR's creation, as literary character, I will always like Snape. From within the story, if he will be the same at the end, I will be annoyed. Ginger, who was a very Snape-like Sunday School teacher at one time, > and it went well. Alla: Hmmm, please allow me to challenge this phrase. :-) Let me explain why. To me the definition of Snape-like teacher must ABSOLUTELY include the fact that said teacher has a grudge against dead parent of one of his/her student AND because of that goes out of his way to make the said student life absolutely miserable. Without it, to me the definition of "Snape-like" teacher is just not complete. Although I don't know you personally, I sincerely doubt that you were a teacher like that. :-) That is probably the main reason I think Snape shouldn't be allowed nowhere around students. Even though he does it to one student,where is the guarantee that if someone else will not insult him during his long life as WW, he won't do the same thing to said person's child? Just my opinion of course, Alla. From tonks_op at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 19:04:17 2005 From: tonks_op at yahoo.com (Tonks) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 19:04:17 -0000 Subject: Sin/Redemption & Snape / Christianity in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128319 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "AyanEva" wrote: > I'll admit that I'm not a Christian because Christianity confuses the crap out of me, but the sin/repentence thing hardly seems fair or very logical. (snip)How can you act in accordance to God's edicts when the edicts are so terribly vague and contradictory, especially considering that the Old and New Testaments don't really match, (snip)In which case, can we even apply to Harry Potter a > morality and theme that not everyone will understand? Otherwise, > wouldn't the books come off as kind of evangelical? That doesn't fit with the fact that no religion is mentioned. ETC... Tonks: (note to elves. This goes a bit OT here and there, but gets back to the series before I am done, so hang in there.) I am sure that Christianity must seem confusing to those that are not Christian. There are many different threads of theology within the Christian Church, even within the same section of the church. So how can we sort out the teaching of JKR, teachings which many of us see as XC (Christian)? When you ask "How can a person like Snape or Percy, or even LV for that matter, be forgiven when they do not think that what they have done was wrong?" The answer on this list will vary with the belief of the writer. However, there is a body of *canon* in CX (Christian) theology just as there is here. The Old Testament has the 10 commandments. True there are many other rules if you are Jewish which were observed in the Old Testament, but the basic ones and the ones that Jesus continued in the New Testament were the 10 commandments that were give to Moses. Jesus said he did not come to change any of it. He just made it clearer. "Love God with your whole heart and soul and love your neighbor as yourself." If you do this you will naturally be following the 10 commandments. These 10 commandments are also the basis of moral truth in other religions as well, but they are not stated quite the same way. One could say that JKR has summed them up herself in the 3 things that one should never do. 1. Kill 2. Force others against their will 3. Hurt others All members of the WW know that these 3 curses are wrong. One could say that the Great Creature of all the worlds (WW, MW, RW) put this knowledge within each of us. We just sort of *know*. This is why in the study of world religions one sees the same basic moral thought. We all, no matter what religion we follow, *know* at a deep level of our being. On the thought of XC redemption, again there are different threads of thought on this. Most XC's don't know that. There is a theologian called Duns Scotus, who said that the greatest thing that God did was to become man/human (the Incarnation). Other theologians say that it was the plan that Jesus would die to redeem the world. But not all say that. Duns Scotus says that God became man and that because he was Love, Jesus chose to follow the love in his heart and the will of the Father and because of this and the nature of mankind, the crucifixion came about. God did not demand a Crucifixion, He may have seen into the future and knew that it was a probability, but did not say "I have to kill my son to redeem the world". (OK folks don't hang me here, I am only telling you about the theology of one of the teachers in the Roman Catholic Church in the 14th century. He was never censured and his thought stands alongside the rest as a valid idea. An idea that I might say seem more plausible to me that the "I have to kill my son" idea. And that doesn't make me a heretic, so don't start firing up the cauldrons!!) How will this play out in the HP book? I do think that JKR is writing about what she believes as a Christian. I also think that JKR is of the Redemption school of thought, so there will be some sort of life freely given, probably by Harry. Maybe by DD since his Patronus points to Christ. As we get toward the end of the series I think that we will see it more clearly. And a reading of the book of Revelation might be helpful, since I think what we will be seeing is the *final battle*. Tonks_op I am not a theologian, but do have a degree in Religious Studies. Anyone who wants to discuss theology or has questions about XC theology may e-mail me directly. PS. Many Christian holidays were built upon the pagan ones before them, but only to convert the pagan. Many XC churches, etc. were built upon the ruins of pagan shrines. Sort of the *king of the mountain* sort of thing. From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 20:25:35 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:25:35 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy and the family row : characterisation matters In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050430202536.14464.qmail@web53106.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128320 --- deborahhbbrd wrote: > Percy has already hurt his parents, and he > knows that, but his pride will not allow him to apologise or > explain, especially since he believes he is in the right. > Similarly, though with more justice, Arthur and Molly can't > apologise to him because they know they're in the right. Of such > are family feuds made.) The thing is, from Percy's POV, Arthur and Molly have suddenly, without any warning, changed the rules on him. He's made a school career out of being the Good Son, and being praised for it by his parents, especially Molly, and having his life made difficult for it by the twins. And I'm willing to bet that Molly's the kind of mom who's ambitions for her kids are pretty intense and not the kind of thing she keeps to herself around the Burrow. Percy's in for a heck of a climbdown in the next book. Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From mgrantwich at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 20:38:18 2005 From: mgrantwich at yahoo.com (Magda Grantwich) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 13:38:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: 6667 Message-ID: <20050430203818.19309.qmail@web53107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128321 > gelite67 at yahoo.com writes: > O.K., this really bothers me. Why didn't DD try to kill Voldemort > at the MOM in OOP? > > I know he told LV, "There are worse things than death." But, so > what? It seems to me that, if LV is the most evil wizard in recent > history, DD would have at least tried to kill him. I think it's because Dumbledore couldn't be sure that killing Voldemort wouldn't also kill or at least seriously harm Harry. There are too many connections now between Voldemort and Harry: the scar, the shared blood protection from the cemetary ceremony in GOF. Dumbledore can't risk danger to Harry. But he has to tell Voldemort something so he goes all metaphysical on him and tells him that "there are worse things..." Magda __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Apr 30 20:49:53 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 20:49:53 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128322 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dumbledore11214" wrote: > Could you or anybody else for that matter, please show me that Snape treats Hermione as capable student she is. That he encourages her to study that he sees her efforts, etc. By that I don't mean that he is NICE to her. It would be enough for me that he ... let's her talk in his class. > Pippin: Oh, that's easy. He treats her as a capable student by *not* calling on her in class. Snape's not interested in the students who know the answers, he's interested in the ones who don't. If she had a weak area in potions, he would doubtless point it out to her with the usual smirk. Hermione hardly needs encouragement to study harder, in fact it would do her good to get her nose out of her books and learn from real life. Alla (post 128318) To me the definition of Snape-like teacher must ABSOLUTELY include the fact that said teacher has a grudge against dead parent of one of his/her student AND because of that goes out of his way to make the said student life absolutely miserable. Pippin: I think this is an oversimplification of what Snape is like. Snape's need to humiliate people stems from the way James treated him, but Harry does things that make him an attractive target. Harry's seeming insolence and disregard of instructions are integral to the way Snape treats him. Harry has never drawn Snape's ire when he was following instructions and minding his own business, not even in that first class. He was making faces and looking around to see what Ron, Hermione, Draco and Seamus were up to, but he didn't notice that Neville needed help. I don't see a straight line between the grudge and Harry. Can you (or anyone) show me canon that Snape would be easier on any other Gryffindor who disregarded Snape's instructions or answered him insolently, or intruded on his most sensitive memories? IIRC, he's just as rough on Ron on the rare occasions when Ron talks back to him, and just as hard on Neville when Neville doesn't do as he's told. It's true that Snape vanishes Harry's potion in the first OOP class, and Harry feels he's being picked on. But Snape says that those who have managed to follow the instructions should turn their samples in for testing, meaning that the others are not going to get credit just because they turned their sample in. Pippin From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 20:51:35 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 20:51:35 -0000 Subject: Funerals are for the living In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128323 Tonks wrote: > I think that religion is very quitely in the background. They > observe Christmas and Easter. Pagan wizards would not do that. a_svirn: I believe "observe" is too strong a word. "Easter" in the series is but a name traditionally used to denote a break between the two terms, as for Christmas it takes the most secular form imaginable. I think even "pagan wizards" should they chanced to be at Hogwarts on Christmas Eve wouldn't mind kissing under Mistletoe and opening presents. Tonks: She has smuggled religion into the > US schools!! But not many people know it because they do not > understand the symbols that they are reading. JKR has the Hogwarts > motto "never tickle a sleeping dragon" for a reason. And I for one > just love it!!! a_svirn: Well, it appears you know something that I don't. a_svirn From jaanise at hello.lv Sat Apr 30 21:03:46 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 00:03:46 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Funerals are for the living In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54dc8$1a157920$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128324 -----Original Message----- From: a_svirn Do they have priests? Is there any such thing as religion at all for wizards? If yes, do they have the same religions and denominations as Muggles? -------------------------- Jaanise: I don't think it is really a matter of religions or priests. Death has a big role in all (I daresay) religions and beliefs, and in some way there are always some funeral ceremony when a man has died. So whatever belief system there is in Wizarding world, I think the absence of any kinf seeing-off for Cedric is quite weird, and even more so for Sirius, who is Harry's godfather after all. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 21:06:49 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 21:06:49 -0000 Subject: Sin/Redemption & Snape / Christianity in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128325 nrenka: > > But people do say "God" in the books (a lot more than they say > Merlin, for instance), even people like Malfoy who some have > postulated as being pureblood and thus pagan. a_svirn: Is that a fact? That would mean that the Weasleys for instance are also pagan. From a_svirn at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 21:24:24 2005 From: a_svirn at yahoo.com (a_svirn) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 21:24:24 -0000 Subject: Sin/Redemption & Snape / Christianity in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128326 Tonks wrote: > --- > PS. Many Christian holidays were built upon the pagan ones before > them, but only to convert the pagan. Many XC churches, etc. were > built upon the ruins of pagan shrines. Sort of the *king of the > mountain* sort of thing. a_svirn: But it can be done the other way round too. There is no reason whatsoever why not to replace Christian rites with good old pagan ones, now that there are no Muggles to pry into wizards' business. Not that I am saying that there is anything "pagan" about Christmas in Hogwarts, mind. I think that religious aspect is simply irrelevant. (Although come to think of it, the DE movement does bear some resemblance to those aristocratic secret societies and exclusive clubs that used to practice particularly unsavoury forms of sacrilege). a_svirn From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 21:26:11 2005 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 21:26:11 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape/Definition of Snape-like teacher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128327 Alla earlier: Could you or anybody else for that matter, please show me that Snape treats Hermione as capable student she is. That he encourages her to study that he sees her efforts, etc. By that I don't mean that he is NICE to her. It would be enough for me that he ... let's her talk in his class. Pippin: Oh, that's easy. He treats her as a capable student by *not* calling on her in class. Snape's not interested in the students who know the answers, he's interested in the ones who don't. If she had a weak area in potions, he would doubtless point it out to her with the usual smirk. Alla: Hmmm, I think you actually proved my point, sort of. :-) Snape is not interested in the students who know the answers, correct? So, how exactly this is a good environment for gifted child, if teacher is not interested in her? Again, Hermione is a capable Potions student, no question about it, I just don't think that Snape gets to take any extra credit for that. So far, I see Snape treating Hermione as one of Potter's friends, no more than that. Just me of course. Alla (post 128318) To me the definition of Snape-like teacher must ABSOLUTELY include the fact that said teacher has a grudge against dead parent of one of his/her student AND because of that goes out of his way to make the said student life absolutely miserable. Pippin: I think this is an oversimplification of what Snape is like. Snape's need to humiliate people stems from the way James treated him, but Harry does things that make him an attractive target. Harry's seeming insolence and disregard of instructions are integral to the way Snape treats him. Harry has never drawn Snape's ire when he was following instructions and minding his own business, not even in that first class. He was making faces and looking around to see what Ron, Hermione, Draco and Seamus were up to, but he didn't notice that Neville needed help. Alla: Pippin, I never said that this is ALL that Snape is like, but yes, I do think that this is an integral part of what Snape is like and very important one at that. You probably know by now that we very strongly disagree on the interpretation of first lesson. I believe that Harry did NOTHING wrong there , was doing exactly that - minding his own business and Snape picked on him absolutely deliberately. I see absolutely no rudeness in Harry answers. I think he was honestly telling Snape that Hermione knows better than him. In short - I see no justification for what Snape did in that class, none. That is just my opinion of course. Pippin: I don't see a straight line between the grudge and Harry. Can you (or anyone) show me canon that Snape would be easier on any other Gryffindor who disregarded Snape's instructions or answered him insolently, or intruded on his most sensitive memories? IIRC, he's just as rough on Ron on the rare occasions when Ron talks back to him, and just as hard on Neville when Neville doesn't do as he's told. It's true that Snape vanishes Harry's potion in the first OOP class, and Harry feels he's being picked on. But Snape says that those who have managed to follow the instructions should turn their samples in for testing, meaning that the others are not going to get credit just because they turned their sample in. Alla: To see the straight line between Harry and grudge, it is enough for me to remember Dumbledore's " some wounds run too deep for healing", and Dumbledore's acknowledgement that it was wrong of him to make Snape teach Harry Occlumency. Honestly, call it oversimplification if you'd like, but to me it is very simple. Snape is so consumed by his hatred for James that he is uncapable of seeing that James' son is not his carboon copy. So, I am not sure what is the correlation between how Snape treats other Gryffindors and Harry and Snape's grudge. Snape treats all Gryffs badly, no question about that. Snape treats Harry and Neville WORSE than he treats al other Gryffs. Are you in disagreement with that? I am also confused by your last sentence. Snape did not really picked on Harry by vanishing his potion because nobody else turned it in for testing? Sorry, you lost me here. Just my opinion, Alla From jaanise at hello.lv Sat Apr 30 21:49:51 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 00:49:51 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Peeves, Ghosts. and the Common Rooms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000301c54dce$899b5f70$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128328 -----Original Message----- From: Angie I know Peeves is not a real ghost but is a poltergeist or a force of chaos, I believe JKR said. Does that mean that Peeves would be "trapped" in the Common Room and couldn't exit if the door was closed? Can he not glide thru walls like the Ghosts can? .. And come to think of it, have any of the Ghosts ever appeared in their respective Common Rooms? I suppose they could just be giving the students privacy, but somehow, I think not. -------------------------- Jaanis: I just found a quote for this: ~~Quote from PoA, Ch9~~ Harry woke extremely early the next morning; so early that it was still dark. For a moment he thought the roaring of the wind had woken him, then he felt a cold breeze on the back of his neck and sat bolt upright - Peeves the poltergeist had been floating next to him, blowing hard in his ear. "What did you do that for?" said Harry furiously. Peeves puffed out his cheeks, blew hard and zoomed backward out of the room, cackling. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From jmrazo at hotmail.com Sat Apr 30 22:11:19 2005 From: jmrazo at hotmail.com (phoenixgod2000) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 22:11:19 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: <42736A1C.4821.48EB157@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128329 > > Shaun: Phoenixgod2000: A well thought out, reasoned pov, Shaun. Don't do that :) > But I am certainly not certain that Hermione derives any great > benefit from Snape's classes - she *might* do so, but it's by no > means certain in my view. Hermione can derive benefits from any sort of class?even divination if it didn't offend her sensibilities--because of who she is and not the teacher. > Where I'm coming from is someone who went to a number of different > schools and who fared very badly in 'modern' schools with all the > modern touchy-feely-let's-worry-about-self-esteem-above-all-else- > academics-aren't-important-teachers-should-be-nice ideas, and who did > extremely well in 'highly traditional' you-kids-are-here-to-learn- and- > we-don't-care-at-all-what-we-need-to-do-to-make-that-happen ideas. I agree with you about the touchy feely PC crap that infests the school system (at least the US one). I agree that teachers are generally there just to teach and not be substitute parents and sometimes that requires a strong hand. I work with a lot of low performing students and you have to push them. And push them hard. But there is a difference between pushing students hard and Snape. > I've no fundamental problems with modern educational ideas - I think > they work well for a lot of kids and where they work, I'm very glad > to see them being used. What I object to is the idea that seems to > develop that new ideas are inherently better than old ones, and that > new philosophies of education should replace traditional > philosophies. In my view, there's no need for that to happen - both > can co-exist. My problem is with Snape defenders. People who have these elaborate fantasies about why Snape is the way he is and justify his actions through contortions of logic that boggle my mind. Snape just isn't a good person or a good teacher. I understand his role in the story, but his role just doesn't require me to justify everything he does the way so many people do. > Because of this, I tend to get rather frustrated when I see people > attacking the methods of teaching used at Hogwarts seemingly on the > basis that they are old fashioned traditional methods. I agree with you. Everything new is not great and everything old is not bad. > Both types of teaching work for some kids, and both types don't work > for some kids. I'll even concede that in general terms, I think the > modern methods done well probably work better in more cases - I just > don't like it when people go so far as to dismiss the old methods. I think you give Snape too much credit when you call what he does a teaching method. I think Snape doesn't really have one. His *method* is merely barely concealed contempt for his students. We've never even really seen him actually teach. IIRC, most of the lesson's we've seen him do are just putting directions on the board and giving out homework. That could be merely a product of not being shown in the books, but something tells me that Snape isn't big on lectures (or any other form of explaining himself). I don't really see him as a teacher at all because I don't think that there is any evidence that he actually cares if anyone even learns Potions. To me, that is what separates Snape from a stern teacher who wants to convey knowledge. Snape is mean because he doesn't want to be bothered. Teachers do not > have to be nice. Teachers do not have to be kind. Teachers do not > even have to be emotionally stable. None of those things are relevant > to their abilities as teachers - because a teachers job is to teach. Well, I would argue that a teacher really should be emotionally stable in order to teach. Maybe even moreso when it comes to magic, which seems to require a certain mastery of emotions. Emotional instability certainly held Snape back from properly teaching Harry. > (At least not in their role as a classroom teacher... teachers can > have other responsibilities besides teaching in such a school - for > example, Snape is head of a house at Hogwarts - and that position > means that he does have some particular and special responsibility > for the welfare of the children in that house that goes beyond their > classroom learning. But he doesn't have it for anyone else. I would argue that Snape does have a moral duty to every student, his house or not. These kids are away from their parents ten months out of the year. They need more than just a head of house for their personal supervision. Do you really think that if Harry went to Flitwick or Sprout that they wouldn't do their best to help him? That they wouldn't do their best for any student who came to them? Snape owes those kids no less. Dumbledore does a disservice to every child in his school by putting a person who seems to not even like children all that much in charge of a very important piece of their education. > My point is two fold. Some kids do learn best in very traditional > environments when information and knowledge is simply presented and > expected to be picked up. The attitudes of the teacher are largely > irrelevant to these kids - sure, it can be a bonus if the teacher is > nicer, but it doesn't really matter. And for many of them, they don't > really want anything else. They just want to learn. They don't want > teachers trying to get to know them, trying to be their friends, > trying to make every class a happy place. Others may not enjoy the > class - but they still may learn very well in it - and that's the > bottom line. Every teacher has a different style that has to fit their subject and their personality. I don't like to comment in general on teaching styles because they are deeply personal things. Tough is good. Kids need tough sometimes. But I don't think that Snape has any sort of teaching style because I don't think he wants to be a teacher. I would lay down money that there isn't a kid in one of his classrooms that doesn't know that he would rather be somewhere else, doing something else, than teaching them. And that makes every difference to kids. > (When it comes to specific students, we do have some indication that > Snape doesn't do well. I think Snape's personal and visceral hatred > of Harry means he cannot teach Harry as effectively as he might > otherwise do so. And I think Neville is one of those kids for whom > Snape's style is simply wrong. But even the best teacher can have > failures with some kids.) Snape's style (poor as it is) does not suit far more children than it does suit imo. > Hermione, to me, seems very much to fit into the mould of a highly > motivated exceptionally or profoundly gifted child. What are you calling gifted? Highly motivated and reasonably intelligent, I'll give you. But I haven't seen any evidence that Hermione is anyway an extraordinarily gifted witch. If she was, the whole house of Ravenclaw would be gifted because they all share Hermione's love of learning. The only wizards I would call gifted in the series are Voldemort, Dumbledore, Harry, Neville, and maybe Ron (chess). They are the only ones who seem to me to have abilities that go above and beyond what an ordinary wizard could do. Hermione doesn't do anything that anyone who studied as much as her couldn't do. Hell, if I could do magic, I would bury myself in books till I could match DD. Magic is way cool :) > As a matter of simple fact, most EG and PG kids do not do that well > in modern education. This isn't because modern educational methods > are inherently bad for such kids - it's just that modern education > often includes ideas tacked onto it that work out being bad for > gifted children (when those ideas are discarded, a lot of modern > teaching actually works very well for such kids). I don't want to go > into all that here - but it's a commonly observed problem. I would be curious about what specifically you are referring to in modern teaching methods and how they relate to gifted children. Could you email me off list? I don't get the chance to work with too many gifted kids. My students tend to be on the umm opposite end of the spectrum. Or at least they act that way till I kick `em in the rear. > We don't know about Hermione's education prior to Hogwarts - but I'm > inclined to think she was lucky enough to be in a place where she got > most of what she needed, but probably not quite everything - not a > bad environment, just not ideal. That assessment is based on my > experience of such gifted kids who seem like Hermione - at age 11, > she hasn't given up on education (which means her experiences > probably weren't that bad) but she does seem incredibly eager to > embrace new things at Hogwarts (which suggests she is finding > challenge at Hogwarts she has never had before). That's speculation - > but informed speculation. An argument could be made that it was simply the, for lack of a better word, magic of what was happening to her. Something new, that she had never heard of, and she was going off to learn it? You would have to be pretty soul-dead not to be eager to learn magic. Harry would probably have been more excited if he didn't think they would kick him out of the school once he got there. > I think Irene is right in that in many (not all) modern real-life > schools Hermione would be discouraged from learning - I constantly > see gifted kids who this has happened to and came very close to being > one myself - discouraged by her peers and even by teachers from > reaching her potential. I think Snape would probably be a pretty discouraging teacher for just about everyone sort of a Hermione level of motivation. Makes you wonder how many potion masters have come out of his classes and how many students would be glad not to get an O so they don't have to take his class anymore. > And while teachers like Snape play a role in that - so do teachers > like McGonagall, teachers like Sprout, Binns, Flitwick, Lupin, > Moody(Crouch)... all teachers who seem to put learning first. They > don't necessarily ignore other things - it's just they are not the > first priority. I guess my argument would be that there is no evidence that Snape puts learning as any sort of priority. > AyanEva: > > I agree whole heartedly. Some of the classes that I learned the most > in were taught by teachers who were, without a doubt, some of the > meanest teachers on the Earth. Seriously, a couple even made me cry > in elementary school, hurt my feelings in middle school, and > infuriated me to the point of tears in high school. In college I had > some similar professors with whom I used to get into full-blown > e-mail arguments. Lots of snarky, short responses and all, but I > learned the material better than the rest of the class just to spite > them. I remember what they taught more so than many of the really > nice teachers who taught really easy classes. The mean professors > aren't out to coddle the students and make friends: Their job is to > force the student to learn, whether they want to or not, and that's > what they do. AyanEva, to me it sounds like your teachers were being tough on you, not for personal reasons, or because they didn't like teaching, but because they wanted to push you into learning as much as you could and reach your potential. That's good. That's the right kind of tough. But ask yourself this before you judge if Snape is that kind of teacher. If Hermione owled him about a potion (wizard equivalent of your snarky emails) do you really think he would owl her back? Oh, and AyanEva, as a diehard Libertarian I love the name. Phoenixgod2000 From jaanise at hello.lv Sat Apr 30 22:12:58 2005 From: jaanise at hello.lv (JaanisE) Date: Sun, 1 May 2005 01:12:58 +0300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The truth ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c54dd1$c48d8600$0fc6f554@janis> No: HPFGUIDX 128330 -----Original Message----- From: Tonks So if I am 100% sure of something I will make a statement that shows that. But if I am not sure, I will do the same as DD with the "I think", or "it seems", "some folks have said", etc. SO I have an out if (God forbid) I am wrong. Since I didn't make an explicit statement of fact, then my being "always right" still stands. So DD *could* be doing the same. -------------------------- Jaanis: Or - he could be *not* doing the same. I, on the contrary, usually use these phrases always, even if I am 100% sure. Or to be more precise, my personal thinking/belief doesn't allow me to be 100% sure about anything, so I would very much use the same phrases as Dumbledore. When he was asked by Snape about how Siriuss was able to get in the Hogwarts in PoA, Dumbledore said he had many theories, one more unlikely than the other. So, he probably is considering many possibilities and is not 100% sure about any of them, leaving a bit of possibility to some situation he might have not thought of. Although the example mentioned by tinglinger about DD's statement of Voldemort's leaving *is* a strong argument against my idea here. Still, that doesn't denies it completely. From lynto at verizon.net Sat Apr 30 22:13:21 2005 From: lynto at verizon.net (Tom Lynch) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 22:13:21 -0000 Subject: DD's failure to kill Voldemort at MOM In-Reply-To: <20050430104625.19527.qmail@web30715.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128331 > My theory on this (again - having originally posted > this in 10/03, #83783) is that Dumbledore knows > that Voldemort doesn't know the entire prophesy -- > Voldemort doesn't know that Harry is the one with the > power to vanquish him. If Voldemort knew that, would > Dumbledore still be "the only one he ever feared"? As > long as Voldemort doesn't know that Dumbledore > (theoretically) can't kill him, Dumbledore still has > that advantage over him. Dumbledore can't risk > losing that by trying and failing to kill him. > > starmom > Zihav: Nope, DD can't kill Voldemort because if he does he'll end up killing Harry as well. Harry and Voldemort are now link by the curse that failed to kill Harry. Voldemort should have died when the curse rebounded onto him. Voldemort even says that (or something like that) in GoF, that he didn't know why he survived, just that one of his experiments must have worked. So now the only one who can kill Voldemort is Harry, the question is how does Harry survive if there linked in this way..... Tom From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Apr 30 22:14:59 2005 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 22:14:59 -0000 Subject: The prophecy - a maverick view.... In-Reply-To: <000001c54dd1$c48d8600$0fc6f554@janis> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128332 I have tended not to post on the topic of the prophecy because, after it came into the public domain nearly two years ago, it has been the subject of endless discussion. Folk who have joined the group over that period may not know that threads on this are rife because of the convoluted searching system of Yahoo. Having been reading some of the latest comments and ruminating on them, I thought I would add a few thoughts of my own which may, or may not, be relevant. I have always been rather sceptical of prophecies since, as a Sixth Former, I was involved in a school production of "Macbeth" where it is shown that prophecies can be very open to misleading and misinterpretation. However, there are some interesting parallels with the Shakespearian prophecies and those currently exercising our collective mind. In case some readers are not familiar with the story of Macbeth, let me give a potted version of the events. Macbeth is a Scottish nobleman ? the Thane of Glamis. Returning from a battle he is greeted by three witches who hail him with his title and also name him Thane of Cawdor and prophesy that he will become the king of Scotland. He is then greeted by messengers from King Duncan who bring news that he has indeed become the Thane of Cawdor. He returns to his castle of Dunsinane where Lady Macbeth persuades him to kill the king while on a visit to fulfil the prediction. He later visits the witches and sees three apparitions who prophesy that (1) he should beware of Macduff, the Thane of Fife, (2) he should not worry about opposition "for none of woman born shall harm Macbeth" and (3) "Macbeth shall never vanquish'd be, until Great Birnam Wood to high Dunsinane Hill shall come against him" [This scene has a link to Harry Potter because, in the "medium that dare not speak its name", the song which is sung at the opening of the Hogwarts school year (Double, double, toil and trouble) draws its words from this latter scene.] After a reign of oppression and terror, MacDuff escapes to England returning with an army to face him. As they approach Dunsinane, the soldiers are told to each take a branch from the trees of Birnam Wood and carry them to give an impression of a larger army. An alarmed Macbeth is told by a messenger: "I look'd towards Birnam and anon methought the Wood began to move." Finally, Macduff and Macbeth meet face to face and Macbeth throws the third prophecy at his opponent to be faced with: "let the Angel whom thou still hast serv'd tell thee, Macduff was from his mother's womb untimely ripp'd" and in the fight which follows Macbeth is killed. So the prophecies are fulfilled but not in the way expected. As an aside, JRR Tolkien was so disappointed at the way Shakespeare resolved the Birnam Wood prophecy that, when he wrote the Two Towers, he created the concept of the Huorns ? the trees which could move. The point here is that the way in which Birnam Wood coming to Dunsinane Hill was fulfilled and also the concept of "of woman born" were very different to the outcome expected by Macbeth. Prophecies are notoriously difficult to interpret as Macbeth found. The Delphic oracle was noted for its enigmatic and sometimes baffling pronouncements and the prophecies of Nostrodamus have been bandied around for a lot longer than those of Sybill Trelawney. So, what about our famous or infamous prophecy? We are told that the one "with the power to vanquish" the Dark Lord would be born at the end of July. As has been pointed out on numerous occasions, "vanquish" in no way means to kill. My dictionary gives "to defeat thoroughly, conquer, overcome, overwhelm, rout, trounce". This has already happened ? more than once. Voldemort was vanquished at Godric's Hollow; but was it by the "one with the power"? Continuing, if Harry is the one, then he repeated this defeat when Quirrell failed to kill him and Voldemort was banished from a physical form again. So he has been vanquished twice at least. OK, he returned in "Goblet of Fire" but does not seem to have recaptured his earlier powers and influence to the same degree. So, in a way, this part of the prophecy has been met. If you consider the thirteen and a half years between Godric's Hollow and the rebirth of Voldemort, the Dark Lord was out of commission from late 1982 to whenever he managed to possess Quirrell a year or so before the events of "Philosopher's Stone" and then out of action physically from then until the rebirth spell was activated on 24th June 1995. So Harry has demonstrated the power to vanquish twice; when next? But then we reach "and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives". This to me is a contradiction in terms. Both Harry and Voldemort are alive. This contradicts the prophecy; one of them should be dead and one should be surviving . So what do we make of this? Do we allow it to drive us round the twist while we try to analyse what our Delphic Professor has said? And then the question of one dying at the hand of the other is open to so many interpretations. Harry could attempt to kill Voldemort or vice versa; the latter has already had several attempts in one way or another. A situation could be created to cause a death perhaps by misadventure, not direct killing; Harry or Voldemort could attempt to lure the other into a trap or a dangerous location. Harry (for I consider he is less likely to try a direct attack) could be attacked by Voldemort and kill him in self-defence .. The whole matter is like a tennis net ? full of holes. We can argue the semantics of "either" and "neither" but I think there are other areas which equally need to be addressed as I have attempted to point out here. To put one more ingredient into the recipe, the use of the word "live". In the Macbeth prophecy, we saw that the use of the word "born" was not what we expected. Coming at "live" from a different angle, Jesus remarked at one point "I have come that they may have life and have it to the full" (John 10:10). Could this mean that, say, Harry could not live life to the full, to have a satisfying and normal life while Voldemort remained and had not been dealt with? Could this be that his life will be constricted and hedged about and thus not as fulfilled as it ought to be for the moment? This might be a possibility to answer the paradox of both living while both also survive. I think I've confused myself even more now .. From elfundeb at gmail.com Sat Apr 30 22:26:36 2005 From: elfundeb at gmail.com (elfundeb) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 18:26:36 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy wording - why not Neville? In-Reply-To: References: <80f25c3a05042818355044b7e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <80f25c3a05043015266baa6ebc@mail.gmail.com> No: HPFGUIDX 128333 > GEO: A majority does not equal truth. There are also Harry is the > Heir of Godric Gryffindor theories out there and so far despite > going past the half way point for the saga and so many numerous > clues that theory so far has turned out to be a dead end. The jury is still out on many many theories, and this is one of them. Nothing in canon contradicts the "Heir of Gryffindor" theories. Nor, as I discuss below, does canon prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Harry is the One described in the prophecy. I wrote: > > It *is* possible that LV marked Neville > > as well as Harry, and we don't know it. > > GEO: Yes it is, but certainly not as his equal. The Death Eaters > also have been marked by Voldemort, but only Harry has been marked > through the scar and the events of 10/31/81 as somewhat of an equal > to Voldemort. That is what Dumbledore believes, and he can make a very reasonable case that it's true, but we don't know this as a fact. We have no idea what may have happened to Neville. He is not marked physically on any part of his body that we can see, but we cannot say with certainty that Neville was not also marked. We also cannot rule out the possibility that Voldemort has not, at this point in canon, marked anyone *as his equal*. Harry has been marked, but as what? Dumbledore's prefaces his statement "there is no doubt that it is you" with the caveat "I am afraid" which can legitimately interpreted to mean that everything after that is Dumbledore's interpretation of events. Moreover, it's unlikely that Dumbledore could conclusively prove all of his interpretations. Dumbledore opines that "in marking you with that scar, he did not kill you, as he intended, but gave you powers, and a future, which fitted you to escape him not once, but four times so far." Note that Dumbledore does not ever state that LV transferred "all" of his powers to Harry. This isn't the first time Dumbledore has suggested that LV transferred some of his powers to Harry. He said so in CoS, but, again, he makes clear that it's his interpretation ("'Unless I'm much mistaken, he transferred some of his own powers to you the night he gave you that scar."). Dumbledore also does not state that LV has equipped Harry with the power to *vanquish* him, only to *escape*. That is something that his parents, and Neville's parents, who according to the prophecy did not have the power to vanquish him (because it says *the* one) have already done three times. He has bested them by escaping a fourth time. I'm not even certain that this is a known fact: I can only count two where powers he received from Voldemort were helpful (CoS and GoF). According to Dumbledore himself, Harry escaped the in Godric's Hollow and in PS/SS because of the power of love (he escaped in OOP because Dumbledore saved him, so I presume DD isn't counting this one). Dumbledore himself tells us of Lily's sacrifice, and he tells us that Quirrelmort could not stand to touch him because of the love behind that sacrifice. ("Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn't realize that love as powerful as your mother's for you leaves its own mark. . . Quirrell could not touch you for this reason.") Unless Harry received the power locked in the DoM from Voldemort (love, the saving-people thing, or however you define it), Voldmort's powers did not help him to escape; it was the power that Voldemort knows not. Dumbledore does identify love as a "power." The problem I see with this theory is that the prophecy refers to the that LV "knows not" in the present tense. If JKR crafted the prophecy properly, Voldemort lacked this power at the time the prophecy was spoken. Therefore, he could not have transferred it to Harry. Also, others have pointed out that his statement of Voldemort's intent doesn't quite make sense. In addition to the merits of their arguments (as well as the possibility of a wand-order-type error), unless Dumbledore has used his Legilimens powers on LV (and there doesn't seem to have been much time for him to do that at the DoM), he doesn't *know* what LV's intent was. So unless he knows exactly what powers Harry has, as well as what is in LV's mind, what he reveals to Harry at the end of OOP consists of conclusions drawn from the evidence at his disposal. They may be reasonable conclusions, but he does not have uncontrovertible proof. JKR unquestionably wants us to believe that Harry is the one. But she also wanted us to believe that Sirius was a DE. I don't think we can rule out the possibility that Dumbledore's explanation was a big setup. And, in my mind, the big tip-off that Dumbledore has not correctly analysed it comes when he tells Harry that the phrase "neither can live while the other survives" means that Harry will have to kill Voldemort or be killed. That's a leap of logic, and JKR has not provided a basis in the text for Dumbledore to make that leap. "Vanquish" does not mean "kill" -- it means to overpower, defeat, overcome, subdue or gain mastery over. > GEO: Thing is, Dumbledore along with Hermione is JKR's two main > sources of giving us information. To have him turn out to be wrong > in this case would equal the writer actually cheating her fans and > readers at this point. Others on related threads have already addressed this point. See tinglinger: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/128268 I will add that many people disagree as to the authoritativeness of JKR's interview statements. In my profession, oral statements cannot trump textual evidence, which is assumed to have been written with much more deliberation and edited for accuracy. The text never says Dumbledore is always right, and I think there are clues in the text that he is not right. Also, I don't believe that JKR said that Dumbledore is always right either (just like Hermione is not always right; she always quotes from a book such as Hogwarts: A History), but I couldn't find the quote on Quick Quotes. Do you have a link? > GEO: I'm sure there is some alternative interpretation, but > certainly not an alternative that would prove in the end that the > information given by Dumbledore and thus the author of the story > wrong. Dumbledore is only wrong in his choices and actions, but so > far he is Rowling's mouth piece and still knows pretty much > everything because the author knows everything there is to the story. JKR knows everything, but her characters don't have the same luxury. She is a master of misdirection and of clues hidden in plain sight. Dumbledore is not omniscient, and admits in the very same chapter that he does make mistakes. > JKR even > > invites us to compare him with Peter Pettigrew ("[Harry] watched, > as > > though somebody was playing a piece of film, Sirius Black blasting > > Peter Pettigrew (who resembled Neville Longbottom) into a thousand > > pieces." (POA ch. 11)). > > GEO: And so far we know he is nothing like Pettigrew. I believe > those comparisons can be identified as nothing, but red herrings put > into the story by Rowling. I agree; that was my point. It was a red herring placed in the story to draw our attention away from Neville's true character. In GoF she began to increase our focus on him, and in OOP she moved him much closer to the spotlight. However, the spotlight is still very much on Harry. > GEO: So basically you really have no textual evidence for this and > support this only because of your desire to have Neville look good > at the end? No, this is only a reason why readers go looking for clues that may suggest that Dumbledore is mistaken in his analysis of the Prophecy. My point was that the clues do not rule out Neville as the One, even if the path to get to that conclusion is much more twisting and *appears* to be strewn with boulders whereas the path to the conclusion that Harry is the One, which is supported by the surface reading of OOP, is straight. But, there is nothing wrong with speculating on this list about other possible outcomes. The reader is not obligated to take Dumbledore's words as gospel. And, of course, this list is not a court of law, so we are not constrained to accept the answer that appears, at this point, to be more likely than not. If I were to go with the odds I would choose Harry, too, but this group would be a lot less fun if we didn't explore all of the possibilities. FAITH is a very strong influence, and she carries Occam's razor in her pocket, but sometimes it's more fun to take the horse with the long odds. Debbie who recalls that in her early days on the list the rule was that *one* bit of canon was enough to float a theory From lealess at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 21:39:40 2005 From: lealess at yahoo.com (lealess) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 21:39:40 -0000 Subject: Sin/Redemption & Snape / Christianity in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128334 AyanEva said: > . . . I'm just having some trouble understanding the applicability > of Christianity to the Harry Potter books . . . Nora replied: > When you get that "will be able to guess what's coming in the > books" there, it points to her religious beliefs informing the > action in fairly strong and direct ways. This has led to a lot of > listie speculation in the past about symbolism/etc., but as > Lupinlore was exploring, it also has potential ethical > ramifications. AyanEva said: > My point is this, I think Snape's intentions are explainable and > pure enough for me because I can't make any sense of the Christian > idea of sin and redemption. > He's doing the right thing now and as long as he keeps doing the > right thing, I can't see why it would matter so much WHY he's > doing what he's doing, so long as he's doing it. Nora replied: > There are many ethical systems which consider intent to be of > fundamental importance in ethics, and JKR seems to be flirting with > some of them. . . . Intentions directly become results. lealess: I want to add a couple of thoughts to this, and although I grew up somewhat indoctrinated into Christianity, I am not a Christian. I can see the good vs. evil theme playing out in HP books, in a complex and interesting way. I can also see the reluctant sacrifice of the one for the greater good of many, but I hope that doesn't happen to Harry, or Dumbledore or Snape, or any character (but I am prepared for the worst). I do have trouble seeing the whole redemption angle, with reference to Snape. It seems to me that redemption has to be granted, in a Judeo-Christian tradition, by some sort of god. It is not something you give yourself, no matter how worthy your deeds or how pure your intent. So will it be that Harry forgives Snape's sins, cures his guilt, and welcomes him into final reconciliation with the good? Or does redemption happen through death, especially through sacrifice, leading to full acceptance by good itself? Redemption seems to be a Judeo-Christian deus ex machina. Anyway, I am sure someone else can explain this concept, and I hope it is not off topic or offensive to anyone. I was trying to think what Christian teachings really might be, and, reflecting my naivet?, they seem to include (1) following/ honoring/ loving a certain higher power and (2) accepting Jesus' teachings as your path for coming into harmony with that power. Then there is what I really took away from the many Sunday schools I attended: faith, hope and charity; love your neighbor as you love yourself; turn the other cheek; judge not lest you be judged; who among you will throw the first stone ? that kind of good stuff, which I still appreciate. It would be great if those concepts fit into the HP books. Having confusingly said that, I want to echo another sentiment expressed by AyanEva, having to do with what we want for the Snape character and even Voldemort after the Final Confrontation: I would like to see more compassion for the characters in the HP books, many of whom are overcoming obstacles of neglect or abuse of one kind or another, including obviously Harry and Snape. I think much of their inability to communicate in the best ways stems from not being listened to, as children and beyond. Hanging on to the past can be bad, but many people are unable to overcome certain traumas. I think Snape is trying, and I am sure Harry will try, but will they ever be whole or happy? Will they become functioning, stable adults? Depends on what the author has planned, but I hope so. And I would like to see a similar resolution for Voldemort. I look for greater insight into the formation and nature of the "evil" characters, with compassion able to prevail over harsh judgment. By the way, I found this in a brief web search when looking for the actual meaning of redemption, in something called Grace Notes (which is inactive, apparently, and I don't know how authoritative it is. Here is the URL, anyway: http://www.realtime.net/~wdoud/topics/redemptn.html): "The word "redemption" in the Old Testament is the translation of the Hebrew word (p?d?h), meaning "to deliver" or "to sever". It was continuously stressed to the Israelites that they belonged to Jehovah because He had redeemed them (severed them from bondage) and had provided them with the land of Canaan for them to use as a gift from God and for His glory. For this reason, all Israel owed their lives and their service to God, in effect making the whole nation a kingdom of priests, at least in spirit." lealess From horridporrid03 at yahoo.com Sat Apr 30 23:12:47 2005 From: horridporrid03 at yahoo.com (horridporrid03) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 23:12:47 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape. Was: Re: Accio 2005 press releaseTrial of Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128335 >>Phoenixgod: >My problem is with Snape defenders. People who have these elaborate fantasies about why Snape is the way he is and justify his actions through contortions of logic that boggle my mind. Snape just isn't a good person or a good teacher. >I think you give Snape too much credit when you call what he does a teaching method. I think Snape doesn't really have one. His *method* is merely barely concealed contempt for his students. We've never even really seen him actually teach. IIRC, most of the lesson's we've seen him do are just putting directions on the board and giving out homework.< >I don't really see him as a teacher at all because I don't think that there is any evidence that he actually cares if anyone even learns Potions. To me, that is what separates Snape from a stern teacher who wants to convey knowledge. Snape is mean because he doesn't want to be bothered.< Betsy: I *have* to jump in here, because I one hundred and fifty million billion percent disagree with you on this, Phoenixgod. And I don't feel that I'm building elaborate fantasies nor do I think I'm contorting logic to do so. I think Snape is a *brilliant* teacher who quite enjoys his job. The opening scene, his speech, his delivery, his dramatic twirls, his pointed questions, all point to a man who *wants* his class to hang on his every word and to understand they'll have to give 110% if they have any hope of pleasing him. There's a reason Hermione was quivering at the edge of her seat, *eager* to prove her knowledge to him. The *only* thing I think Snape did differently in this class was to pound Harry with his questions. I'm betting he usually spread his impossible to answer questions around in order to impress the need to go beyond the usual surface readings upon all his students. (I doubt he'd have ever called on Hermione though. The whole point was to get the "I don't know" answer. Hermione showed that she didn't need the extra motivation the less studious students needed.) As to the readers seeing Snape teach, we see him teaching just about as much as we see McGonagall teaching. If we went solely on what we read in the books we'd have to say that McGonagall's teaching method was to set a task and make the students repeat it and repeat it until they finally picked it up on their own. JKR isn't interested in giving us an *actual* Potions class, just as she isn't interested in giving us an actual Transfigurations class. So she gives us shortcuts. No one acts out in either Snape or McGonagall's classes. JKR specifically tells us that neither teacher needs to expend any effort at getting their class to come to order or listen to the teacher. We're also specifically told that Snape teaches above the required Potions levels for the different age groups (something an uninterested teacher would *never* do - too much extra effort) and that his students have a high pass level on their OWLS -- again, not the mark of a disinterested or incompetent teacher. Actually, this is the area where I feel that those arguing Snape is a terrible teacher tend to bend logic. They disregard Snape's high pass rate. They insist that if Harry and/or Neville did well on their OWLS it will be because of outside study or something equally unsupported by the books. The proof is in the pudding in this case, IMO, anyway. >>Phoenixgod: >I would argue that Snape does have a moral duty to every student, his house or not. These kids are away from their parents ten months out of the year. They need more than just a head of house for their personal supervision. Do you really think that if Harry went to Flitwick or Sprout that they wouldn't do their best to help him? That they wouldn't do their best for any student who came to them? Snape owes those kids no less. Dumbledore does a disservice to every child in his school by putting a person who seems to not even like children all that much in charge of a very important piece of their education.< Betsy: And yet, Snape has helped Harry, outside merely teaching potions, from the first book on. He kept Harry on his broom in PS/SS and in OotP Snape may well have saved Neville's life (the comment to Goyle or Crabbe to lessen up on their choke hold) and he was certainly responsible for saving Harry and Neville and Ron and Hermione and Ginny and Luna by informing the Order of what Harry was doing. I'm not suggesting that Snape is Harry's best friend or that he's constantly looking out for Harry's emotional well-being. But he has consistently looked out for Harry physical well-being in a way that Flitwick and Sprout may well have done themselves but haven't. I think the only person who's been more responsible for keeping Harry alive and unharmed has been Dumbledore. >>Phoenixgod: >Snape's style (poor as it is) does not suit far more children than it does suit imo.< Betsy: Seriously though, how do you explain his high pass rate then? Betsy who's off to see Hitchhiker's Guide and so hopes this post made some sort of sense From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Apr 30 23:29:53 2005 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 23:29:53 -0000 Subject: Hermione and Snape/Definition of Snape-like teacher In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 128336 > Pippin: > Oh, that's easy. He treats her as a capable student by *not* calling > on her in class. Snape's not interested in the students who know the answers, he's interested in the ones who don't. If she had a weak area in potions, he would doubtless point it out to her with the usual smirk. < > > Alla: > > Hmmm, I think you actually proved my point, sort of. :-) Snape is > not interested in the students who know the answers, correct? So, > how exactly this is a good environment for gifted child, if teacher > is not interested in her? Pippin: Because often the best thing a teacher can do for a gifted child is to stay the !@#$ out of her way and not put any additional pressure on her. McGonagall fulfills the first part but not the second. Remember the time turner? Remember who Hermione's boggart is? There'd be even more pressure on Hermione to have the right answer when called on in potions with a chorus of Slytherins ready to pounce and snigger if she got anything wrong. > Alla: > > I see absolutely no rudeness in Harry answers. I think he was > honestly telling Snape that Hermione knows better than him. Pippin: "I don't know," said Harry quietly. "I think Hermione does, though, why don't you ask her." A few people laughed. Harry caught Seamus's eye and Seamus winked. If Harry had no idea he was insulting Snape (and Hermione!) I think he'd have been puzzled about why people laughed and Seamus winked. > Alla: > > To see the straight line between Harry and grudge, it is enough for me to remember Dumbledore's " some wounds run too deep for healing", and Dumbledore's acknowledgement that it was wrong of him to make Snape teach Harry Occlumency. Pippin: To me, Dumbledore is saying that Snape could not bear to know that Harry had witnessed his humiliation at the hands of James. That wound has not healed. And that the lessons were also a mistake because Harry did not trust Snape. That Harry does not trust Snape has something to do with the way Snape treats him, but also with Harry's general feelings about Slytherins--or can you name a Slytherin that Harry trusts? Alla: > Honestly, call it oversimplification if you'd like, but to me it is very simple. Snape is so consumed by his hatred for James that he is uncapable of seeing that James' son is not his carboon copy. Pippin: Perfectly plausible, except that I am suspicious when JKR makes things too easy for us, especially when it is only Book Five. Alla: > I am also confused by your last sentence. Snape did not really > picked on Harry by vanishing his potion because nobody else turned > it in for testing? Sorry, you lost me here. Pippin: Harry assumes that he is the only one who is going to get a zero, because the others are allowed to turn their potions in. But Snape says he is going to test them, so if the others are completely worthless, they will get zero too. Pippin From donnawonna at worldnet.att.net Sat Apr 30 18:56:07 2005 From: donnawonna at worldnet.att.net (Donna) Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2005 14:56:07 -0400 (Eastern Daylight Time) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prophecy's wording References: Message-ID: <4273D4C7.000004.03276@D33LDD51> No: HPFGUIDX 128358 Brothergib: I think the most interesting thing about the prophecy is revealed if you compare both of Trelawney's prophecies: No.1 IT WILL HAPPEN TONIGHT. 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 Conclusion - Dumbledore was only allowing Harry to hear certain parts of the prophecy, not the whole prophecy. Perhaps this is why DD was so uncomfortable talking to Harry about this. Once again he is not telling Harry the WHOLE truth! Bonnie: This disturbs me greatly. Maybe you have something here. What if the missing part is the part that would tell LV how to destroy Harry? Harry seems so vulnerable. So often he's only escaped by chance. I was hoping DD was going to be open with Harry now. If DD is still keeping things to himself, I'm not a happy camper. Donna: Perhaps DD is not telling Harry the entire prophecy because of the obvious mental/psychic connection between Harry and LV. No one wants LV to know the entire prophecy and if Harry knows it there is the chance LV will retrive it from Harry's mind. Donna