Re: CHAPDISC3: HBP 3, WILL AND WON’T
Sherry
Sherry at PebTech.net
Mon Nov 7 18:48:41 UTC 2005
No: HPFGUIDX 142584
--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "rbookworm46" <rbookworm46 at y...>
wrote:
>
> CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter
> 3, Will and Won't.
>
> Q1: Does this signal a change in attitude toward Harry? Is this a
> grassroots change or a campaign started by the Ministry?
It's not so much changing as reverting back to the early admiration
for Harry. As Ron commented about the Daily Prophet story near the end
of OotP, "He's 'The Boy Who Lived' again now, though, isn't he?" The
Ministry (and the Daily Prophet coverage) had tried to portray Harry
as having delusions--including, say, the return of Voldemort. But now
that they've had to recognize Voldemort's return, they're trying to
swing the boy-champion back into their camp.
>
>
> Q3: Events later in the book show us that Scrimgeour tries to use
> Harry to get some positive publicity for the Ministry. Do you think
> this is what caused the rift between Scrimgeour and Dumbledore –
> that Scrimgeour wanted to set up a meeting with Harry and Dumbledore
> refused? Or do you think there are some long-standing issues
> between them?
A mixture of both. The immediate rift is over Scrimgeour's plans to
use Harry and Dumbledore's goal of protecting him. But I think they
have longer disagreements. As a career Auror, Scrimgeour very likely
agreed with--may even have used--the MM's allowing Aurors to use the
Unforgiveables during the last Wizarding War. Dumbledore, on the other
hand, most likely opposed the use of these weapons which the Death
Eaters favored.
>
> Q4: Is Mrs. Longbottom one of those who "seem reassured" by the new
> security measures? What do you think she said that is hidden from
> us?
>
If she feels reassured, it's probably only because the security
measures show that the Ministry and the general population are
recognizing the crisis. After what her son and daughter-in-law
suffered, and now her grandson's contribution, she surely has a more
realistic view of Voldemort's strategy. She was probably pointing out
that Neville is one of the Hogwarts students who could be in danger
(especially because he's a housemate of Harry).
> Q5: Do these measures seem reasonable?
>
It depends on who's using these spells, how many people have been
taught to use them, and/or what objects they've been applied to. Here
I'm referring to things--buildings, rooms, pieces of furniture,
etc.--which have been enchanted.
>
> Q8: What do you think of Dumbledore's behavior here?
>
I think he's forcing in the Dursleys' faces--or down their throats, if
they'd open them--how much they've done wrong to Harry. He's certainly
realized for some time that the Dursleys had mistreated Harry, but he
was in a position where he thought this might be Harry's ONLY chance
to live until he comes into his power and is taught enough to help him
face Voldemort.
> Q9: Do you believe that the Order will ever move back to 12
> Grimmauld Place? Why not move someplace friendlier? Do they
> secretly enjoy irritating Mrs. Black? <g> Is it because Phineas's
> portrait, or something else that is significant, is in the house?
>
Phineas' portrait can be useful, as we've seen in OotP. The problem is
that it's so hard for the Order to be truly *sure* that they and their
mission are safe with someone or in any specific place. 12 Grimmauld
Place is a haven, is someplace they've come to rely on, and it's not
that easy for a secret force to find another one.
> Q10: Do you think *anything* will bring Harry back to the house?
> Do you think pleasant memories could ever change the atmosphere of
> the house?
>
I expect Harry to return to the house in Book 7. As the Order
headquarters and his property, it's the obvious choice for his London
"center of operations" in his mission to find the Horcruxes and
confront Voldemort. If he and Ginny, for example, spend time together
there, it can definitely change the atmosphere. Here, he could also
have a chance to get acquainted with the younger, less tortured
heritage of his godfather.
> Q11: Is this just Vernon's normal reaction, or is it something more
> significant?
Greed is pretty much Vernon's normal reaction, yes. Harry is the heir
to a piece of property--that would get his attention!
>
> Q13: Why does Dumbledore say this now? Why not 5 years ago? At
> this point, why say it at all?
Because with Voldemort's return, and the WW's recognizing that, the
situation has come to a crisis. 5 years ago, he still thought that he
could best protect Harry by keeping things calm, at least on the
surface, with Vernon and Petunia. The thin coating of a typical
situation has been torn off, so now there's nearly nothing to lose by
confronting them.
>
> Q15: What is significant about Harry turning 17 or "coming of age"
> that would cause the protection to end?
>
The protection has worked both ways: sharing the home has protected
not only Harry, but the Dursleys themselves.
> Q16: Why was Petunia "oddly flushed"?
>
I'm convinced she still knows something we (and Harry) don't--whether
it was something she found out from Lily, from the letter that
Dumbledore left with Harry, or a combination. She's tried to bury this
beneath her conscious memory for about sixteen years, but these events
bring it to the front of her mind.
> Q17: Do you think Harry will be allowed to return to Privet Drive?
Yes--whether "be allowed" means that the Dursleys allow him, or
whether they don't have much choice, is open to question! I also think
that in this return, Harry will learn something important, probably
related to what his aunt knows.
Well, I've been speculating. Now I get to read other people's
contributions!
Amontillada
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive