Broken potionvial WAS: Re: Bad Writing? (was: JKR and the boys)

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 163211

Neri:
> I think your canon misses the context and the situation. If you 
start a paragraph earlier you find this:

***********************************************************
*(snip)*
***********************************************************

Ceridwen:
Actually, I did read from that far back, and a bit farther.  I've 
found out in life that what happens at the moment is not always what 
has happened in context.  And, re-reading the portion I (hopefully!) 
snipped, I saw cause where Harry may have been just a bit cocky.  He 
was under no pressure from Snape to cut correctly or to dice properly 
or to add only the required amount.  He was completely on his own in 
this potion, he felt he had done a good job without any outside 
input, not even from Hermione.  He thought he "might at least have 
scraped an E", and bottled his sample and took it to Snape.  He put 
it down, turned away, and heard a crash.  Malfoy laughed, Snape said 
his line, Harry determinedly went back to bottle more, only to find 
that Hermione had done him a favor by cleaning out his cauldron.  
Yup, I read the entire scene, and after doing so, I realized that I 
had not read that Snape had dropped it, the scene leaves it open for 
Harry to have messed up big-time as people sometimes do when they are 
cocky.


Potioncat:
> > 'Whoops,' he said softly. 'Another zero, then Potter...'

Neri:
> Draco appears surprised. He laughs, but he didn't see it coming and 
so didn't have time to come up with the usual smart-ass remark. Snape 
OTOH isn't surprised at all, his remark sounds well planned and he 
had time to see the implication on Harry's mark. Moreover, the 
words "another zero" are calculated to immediately remind the reader 
of the *previous* zero:

***********************************************************
*(snip)*
***********************************************************

Ceridwen:
Yes, the use of the word "another" certainly does imply that this is 
not the first one.  I am not sure if it is only the second over the 
course of the series.  It has nothing to do with Harry receiving an 
zero for dropping his potion this time, and nothing to do with 
Hermione cleaning Harry's cauldron for him this time, either.  I 
don't know what JKR would assume.  She wrote this scene, and there is 
no absolute certainty that either Snape or Harry dropped the flask.

Neri:
> Accidents in stories aren't accidental. They are intended plot 
points (making something happening, like Mclaggen accidentally 
knocking Harry
was needed for Gryffindor to lose the match) or characterization 
(like Neville's accidents characterize him as clumsy and insecure). 

Ceridwen:
This accident, if it is indeed one, could underscore that "Pride 
goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. 
(Proverbs 16:18)"

Neri:
> At most they can be red herrings, made to look like they were 
intended by the character but aren't really. However, unless Draco or 
Snape confide in Book 7 that it was accidental, which I very much 
doubt, the dropped flask wouldn't make any red herring or any other 
plot point that I can see. In any case Snape is quick to take unfair 
advantage of it for his private revenge, so accidental dropping would 
hardly even make him look better. It would merely make the story 
weaker.

Ceridwen:
There is still the ticklish question of why Hermione didn't mention 
it immediately afterwards, when she apologized for evanescoing 
Harry's cauldron, or Ron, Dean or Neville didn't say something later 
on.  Even Harry doesn't consciously think, so the narrator can 
report, that Snape did it.  He merely determines to provide a second 
sample and force Snape to mark it.  This incident could be used to 
underscore that Harry needs to stop being prideful, or that he needs 
to learn that he needs other people.  He has been thrown off on his 
own at the Dursleys' and so is not trusting of others, and (this is 
actually a good thing), he is a normal teenager with the normal 
arrogance of innocent youth.  Unfortunately, he needs to get over 
those things, both of them, before confronting LV.  So, instead of 
making the story weaker, it refers back to the main point of the 
story, the need for Harry to prepare to face Voldemort.  In my 
opinion, of course.

Neri:
> To my (admittedly limited) knowledge of informal English, "oops" 
indicates authentic startle, while "whoops" is ironic or otherwise 
insincere.

Ceridwen:
As a native speaker, I use "hoops".  No, I did not accidentally leave 
out the "w".  "Hoops" is easier for me to pronounce.  I can 
pronounce "whoops" and "oops", but I am just more comfortable 
with "hoops".

As to the use of "whoops" and "oops", they seem to be 
interchangeable, depending on which is more comfortable to the 
speaker.  The Weasley twins' "Whoops-a-daisy" can also be said "Oops-
a-daisy", or even "Whoopsy/oopsy daisy".  The whole "daisy" thing is 
something one says to a small child or an infant, as in Magpie's 
example of "Whoops-a-daisy" when an infant learning to walk falls 
down.  The infant didn't mean to fall, the infant probably didn't 
want to fall, and the infant might just start crying, except Mom just 
said something funny, so the infant is set on its feet again so it 
can continue trying.  And, certainly, while Mom probably did expect 
the infant to fall, she most likely did not push the infant.

Both "Whoops" and "Oops" can be uttered when one steps in a mess, or 
smears something on one's clothes, or sits on a bench whose "wet 
paint" sign has blown away.  In your examples, there is no instance 
of a single character using "whoops" in one case while using "oops" 
in another.  The difference could just be characterization, not 
incident.  And, for the scene between the Weasley brothers, Ron's 
contention may or may not be the truth.  He might have cut his own 
thumb all by his lonesome.  The twins were distracting him, which can 
make anyone cut themselves when using a knife.  Using the 
formula "whoops-a-daisy" merely means the twins were implying he is 
still a child or an infant - he is too young to use magic outside of 
school.  There should be a lifetime of baggage in that scene, 
brothers interacting since Ron's birth.

Lockhart was merely covering up his own ineptitude.

> Neri, who had never imagined there could even be a debate about 
Snape dropping the flask on purpose.

Ceridwen:
Before I looked it up, I wouldn't have thought so, either.  But, 
having gone back and read the Potions class scene, I am not so 
certain, and am leaning toward Harry's "haughty spirit" in this case 
going before a fall.

Ceridwen.