Two Weeks of Posts, more topics than will fit in Subject line

[Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)]

No: HPFGUIDX 156594

Cassy Ferris wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/155921>:

<<  By the way, I was really amazed how soon Harry recovered from his
loss. merely two weeks passed between the end of Ootp and the
beginning of HBP and he already managed to put Sirius's death behind
him. >>

I think that was totally unrealistic and the author did it only for
plot purposes.

Marion Ros wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/155990>:

<< It is my opinion that any Good Guy who pretends to have morals or
virtues that he does not truly possess or practice (snip), then that
Good Guy is a hypocrite. >>

Someone famous said: "Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to
virtue." Hypocrites, compared to someone who is open and honest about
the evil he/she does, at least show that they know that doing evil is
something to be ashamed of.

Janelle wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/155992>:

<< now all of a sudden she's gone and changed things, so I feel kinda
like the story wont be entirely accurate or something like that >>

We were in the same situation after GoF, when she told interviewers
that she had almost finished writing it when she discovered a huge
plot hole and had to re-write the whole middle of the book and in the
process lost a character. We are in the same situation whenever we go
to her website and read about old plot ideas that she abandoned.

Miles wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156552>:

<< In German speaking countries, storks are said to bring all newborn
children (I'm not sure this "legend" is inter-cultural). >>

This is also very widespread folklore in USA.

Carol wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156003>:

<< The strong have a duty to protect the weak, or at least a moral
obligation not to use their strength against the defenseless. (snip)
Fred and George should think before they act and not use their
strength against another's weakness whatever the victim may have done
to "deserve" it >>

Harry's strength is that he still loves despite his Dursley upbringing
and Voldemort's weakness is that he cannot love (which I believe was
inborn), and Dumbledore cheers for Harry to use this strength against
that weakness. On the whole, *effectively* using any strength that the
good guys, or even the Ministry, have against any weakness that
Voldemort has in order to vanquish Voldemort is considered smart
tactics rather than unfair advantage. 

Parents are physically stronger than their young children, and have
advantages such as legal rights and greater knowledge of the world
over even their physically large and strong minor children, and most
people approve of some parents doing some form of punishment (spanking
seems to 'out' now, but time-outs are 'in') to their children who
deserve it.

(Dudley isn't Voldemort, and Fred and George aren't his parents, but I
feel interested in the general principle you stated.)

Gerry wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156019>:

<< I sincerely hope Draco's inability to kill DD had nothing to do
with cowardice, but with finally realizing killing someone is evil. >>

I think that is what JKR intended, but that'd be hard to prove (to
Draco, who is surely reviling himself for being a coward and a failure
and a useless little wimp). As DDM!Snape fans cite him forcing himself
to kill his beloved mentor DD as courage, and real!Moody killed Death
Eaters even tho' he tried to capture them alive for trial.

Julie17 wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156206>:

<<  Note Dumbledore's deliberately humiliating method of awarding the
[House] House cup to Gryffindor [in PS/SS] >>

Someone pointed out on some previous occasion where that event was
discussed, that for all we know DD was following standard practise,
that maybe always the Great Hall starts out decorated in the colors of
last year's winner, last-minute points are awarded, and the Great Hall
is re-decorated if another House is this year's winner. It was a nice
piece of suspense writing for Harry and a terrible disappointment for
Draco because they, first-years, didn't know the custom.

Potioncat wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156262>:

<< I do wish Hermione had said clearly to us how she knew Tobias was a
Muggle. >>

So do I, but I bet it was something like 'Eileen Prince weds Tobias
Snape. The bride was educated at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and
Wizardry, and is the daughter of Ian Prince who is a security guard at
the Ministry of Magic. The groom was educated at Budleigh Babberton
Comprehensive and is a cleaner at a Ford automobile dealership.'

Potioncat wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156555>:

<< Harry and a 16-year-old Riddle come in contact with an auburn
haired DD. Was he 100 years old then? Eleven or 12 years later (40
years ago?) DD looks much like he does now. That's a lot of aging in
12 years, with not much more in the next 40. >>

I developed a theory, when Karkaroff had white hair in GoF, but black
hair in the GoF Pensieve scene, that white hair is the sign of being
Headmaster.

Nikkalmati wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156284>:

<< JKR even lays it on thicker by telling us [James] hexed other
people in the halls >>

Ginny hexes people in the halls (or at least Zacharias in the
corridors of the Hogwarts Express) just because they annoy her, and
she's supposed to be so wonderful. Her red hair *may* resemble Lily,
but her *behavior* seems more to resemble young James.

Betsy Hp wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156329>:

<< just because we've been told that James and Sirius regularly hexed
people doesn't mean that it's a good thing. The fact that they were
punished so often for doing so is telling, IMO.  >>

Is there canon that ANY of their punishment cards were for hexing
other students? I think I could argue that ALL of them were for being
out after curfew as easily as that all of them were for hexing other
students. I suspect many were pranks, like tricking a teacher into
picking up a trick fake wand for a classroom demonstration and
ensorcelling a poster so that when the teacher revealed it, it was the
centerfold from PLAYWIZARD instead of the chart of the Trojan Asteroids.

random832 wrote in
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/156296>:

<< there's no textual basis for there being any real difference
between squibs and muggles, any more than between muggleborn and
pureblood/halfblood/second-gen wizards. >>

If there is any real genetics to the inheritance of magic, it *must*
include at least one recessive gene, because so many magic children
(homozygous recessive) are born to Muggle parents (heterozygous). So
Squibs, non-magic children born to magic parents, must be homozygous
recessive for the magic gene -- their parents can't give them any
other version of that gene. So I figure their inability to do magic
must be some kind of birth defect, a non-genetic condition. That would
go along with a quarter of the kids at Hogwarts are Muggle-born, but
Squibs are 'quite unusual' (according to Ron in CoS).

It appears that Squibs have a magical level of communication with
their cats. The best mine manage to tell me is 'Feed me', 'Pet me', or
'Follow me' -- they can lead me to a closet that another cat is locked
inside, but they can't tell me 'Cinnamon is locked in the closet, go
let him out." They can't tell me 'Mundungus Apparated away while on
guard duty'.

I have an uncanonical theory that the number of wizards remains
constant because whenever a wizard dies, a wizard is born. The magic
from the dead wizard seeks a newborn to inhabit. The criteria for
which newborn would be 1) genes for magic, 2) prenatal exposure to
magic, 3) geographic distance from the death. So while the Death
Eaters were killing wizards by the score in their attempts to
eliminate Muggle-borns and Muggle-born allies, the high number of
deaths of wizards would lead to high numbers of births of wizards, not
enough wizard giving birth to meet those numbers, leading to increase
of Muggle-born wizards -- I like the irony of LV's efforts being so
very counter-productive. And Squibs would result when wizards give
birth at a time when no wizard is dying. If wizarding folk decided to
catch up on baby-making after LV's 1981 defeat, that could lead to a
significant increase of Squibs.