Copyediting Errors

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 157273

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote:
> I forgot to include this bit of canon in my earlier reply:
> 
> "Fifty years before, at daybreak on a fine summer's morning, when 
> the Riddle House had still been well kept and impressive, a maid 
> had entered the drawing room to find all three Riddles, dead" (GoF 
> Am. ed. 1-2). The narrator also refers to the incident as 
> occurring "half a century ago"(1). Either this figure, in both 
> versions, is an estimation, or Tom killed his parents exactly 
> fifty years before the beginning of GoF, in which case, he did it 
> between his sixth and seventh years, when he was seventeen, which 
> would make sense because he'd be legally an adult and free of the 
> orphanage, and which would still allow him to return for his 
> seventh year and talk to Slughorn about Horcruxes. But the 
> description of Tom as "by no means theoldest" of the group of boys 
> is a bit confusing if he's a seventh year since the oldest boy 
> in the group could be at most three months older than he is. 
> (I think the description is meant to suggest that Tom, a
> sixth year, is the leader of a gang that contains seventh years.)
> 
> Either way, whether he's sixteen, as he would be if the murders
> occurred after Myrtle's death, or seventeen, as a literal reading 
> of "fifty years" would indicate, "in his sixteenth year" is an 
> error if it's intended to mean age fifteen. The "fifty years" in 
> GoF takes thatstatement farther from the mark, not closer to it.
> 
> Carol, hoping that Mike is satisfied now

Mike now:
Canon, I knew you had it in ya. If anyone could find something to 
contradict DD's statement you could. Unfortunately, this timeline 
puts Tom's patricide after his sixth year, which is more of a 
problem than after his fourth year (don't worry, I'm not gonna go 
into it). Fortunately, what it does do is provide us an alternate 
canonical timeline that disputes the infamous "sixteenth year".

IMO these two opposing canonical statements cancel each other out. 
Now, we can say that JKR contradicted herself, so we can postulate: 
*what the lady meant to say was...*. So you and I can agree that JKR 
meant to say 'when Tom was sixteen, he left the orphanage...' and 
feel reasonably sure that it won't be contradicted in Book 7. More 
importantly, we aren't imposing our own view, we are clearing up a 
canonical mistake that JKR isn't going to.

So, yes Carol, I'm satisfied. I wasn't from your preceding post. 
BTW, you really don't want me to answer the question of why Tom 
would continue to pursue openning the Chamber, do you?

Mike, wondering if Carol will regret working so hard to convincing 
me to accept this revision after I use it to bolster my Harry is a 
Horcrux theory with it?