Mysteries to me; maybe not to you

[hekatesheadband]

No: HPFGUIDX 144676

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Bart Lidofsky <bartl at s...> wrote:
>
> Bart:
> Can anybody explain why Dumbledore was knocked backwards and out a 
> window by Snape's AK spell?

All AKs knock the victim up and back: that's why they're on their
backs spread-eagled. Otherwise they'd either collapse facedown
(real-world physics) or topple back/sideways. If you read closely the
scene where "Moody" kills the spider and the one where Bella kills the
fox, you'll see that little element. The other ones we've seen are
elliptical at best, but Cedric wound up in that position.

This may be compounded by the fact that all of Snape's offensive
wand-work (in the sense of "the opposite of defence," not "morally or
personally repellant") - his "expelliarmus" in CoS, the Sectusempra he
cast on James in the OotP memory, and whatever he did to Harry before
Buckbeak intervened in HBP, all caused their targetss to be lifted
somewhat and then to fall backward. That's not normal for the first
two spells; no info on the third. Part of the Potterverse seems to be
that advanced or powerful spells vary slightly in their effects
according to caster, just as apparation sounds, patroni, and animagus
forms vary between individuals.

> 
> Can anybody explain why a personal award given to Tom Riddle ended
up in 
> Filch's office?

I've lent my books out, but I think it was in a hall with a bunch of
trophies, which Filch had Ron clean during detention. That one was
memorable not because of its placement but because Ron kept vomiting
slugs on it. Good on him, too! ;)
> 
> Can anybody explain why Snape sent out the alarm about the raid on the 
> Ministry?

No matter what his alleigance, both sides must believe that he is
really loyal to and spying for them while only hoodwinking the other
into believing the same thing. (If it failed, Dumbledore would have
him in Azkaban or Voldemort would have him in the ground. Or the
water; take your pick.;) If he is loyal to Dumbledore, he must
raise the alarm for obvious reasons. Under any circumstances, he can
then tell Voldemort that he dallied to give the Death Eaters
sufficient time to carry out the plan, while maintaining Dumbledore's
trust and thus his useful position as a spy. If he's actually on
Dumbledore's side, this is a lie. If he's really on either Voldemort's
or only his own side, it's true. No matter what, it's the only way to
keep all his bases covered.

> 
> Can anybody explain why Lord Voldemort must not be named? Or why they 
> just don't call him "Tommy"?

That one I'm inclined to chalk up to aesthetic predilection on JKR's part.

-hekatesheadband

Because the Sorting Hat is really Bono.